UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

J»M6 


LIBRARY 


ECONOMICS 


Class 


Book 


Volume 


b  31  Vs 

WS£-RQRADUATC  LIBRARY 

Je  07-10M  ROOM  12^ — 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

now 

University  of  Illinois  Library 


SERIES  OF  HAND-BOOKS  IN  SEMITICS 


EDITED  BY 

JAMES  ALEXANDER  CRAIG 

PROFESSOR  OF  SEMITIC  LANGUAGES  AND  LITERATURES  AND 
HELLENISTIC  GREEK,  UNIVERSITY  OF  MICHIGAN 

Recent  scientific  research  has  stimulated  an  increasing  interest 
m  Semitic  studies  among  scholars,  students,  and  the  serious  read¬ 
ing  public  generally.  It  has  provided  us  with  a  picture  of  a 
hitherto  unknown  civilization,  and  a  history  of  one  of  the  great 
branches  of  the  human  family. 

The  object  of  the  present  Series  is  to  state  its  results  in  popu¬ 
larly  scientific  form.  Each  work  is  complete  in  itself,  and  the 
Series,  taken  as  a  whole,  neglects  no  phase  of  the  general  subject. 
Each  contributor  is  a  specialist  in  the  subject  assigned  him,  and 
has  been  chosen  from  the  body  of  eminent  Semitic  scholars  both  in 
Europe  and  in  this  country. 

The  Series  will  be  composed  of  the  following  volumes : 

I.  Hebrews.  History  and  Government.  By  Professor  J.  F. 
McCurdy,  University  of  Toronto,  Canada. 

II.  Hebrews.  Ethics  and  Religion.  By  Professor  Archibald 

Duff,  Airedale  College,  Bradford, England.  [AW;  Ready. 

III.  Hebrews.  The  Social  Lije.  By  the  Rev.  Edward  Day, 

Springfield,  Mass.  [Now  Ready. 

IV.  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  with  introductory  chapter 

on  the  Sumerians.  History  to  the  Fall  of  Babylon. 

V.  Babylonians  and  Assyrians.  Religion.  By  Professor  J. 
A.  Craig,  University  of  Michigan. 

VI.  Babylonians  and  Assyrians.  Life  and  Customs.  By 
Professor  A.  H.  Sayce,  University  of  Oxford,  England. 

[Now  Ready. 

VII.  Babylonians  and  Assyrians.  Excavations  and  Account 
of  Decipherment  of  Inscriptions.  By  Professor  A.  V. 
Hilprecht,  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

VIII.  Syria  and  Palestine.  Early  History.  By  Professor 
Lewis  Bayles  Paton,  Hartford  Theological  Seminary. 

[Now  Ready. 

IX.  Development  of  Islamic  Theology,  Jurisprudence, 
and  Theory  of  State.  By  Professor  D.  B.  Mac¬ 
donald,  Hartford  Theological  Seminary. 

The  following  volumes  are  to  be  included  in  the  Series,  and 
others  may  be  added  : 

X.  Phcenicia.  History  and  Government,  including  Colonies, 
Trade ,  and  Religion. 

XI.  Arabia,  Discoveries  in,  and  History  and  Religion  until 
Mohammed. 

XII.  Arabic  Literature  and  Science  since  Mohammed. 
XIII.  The  Influence  of  Semitic  Art  and  Mythology  on 
Western  Nations. 


Cbe  Semitic  Series 


THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE 
HEBREWS 


By  the  Rev.  EDWARD  DAY 


tlbe  Semitic  Series 

THE  SOCIAL  LIFE 
OF  THE  HEBREWS 


BY 

The  Rev.  EDWARD  DAY 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNERS  SONS 

1907 


•  «  •••••■* 


Copyright,  1901,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER’S  SONS 


trOw  directory 

PRINTING  AND  BOOKBINDING  COMPANY 
NEW  YORK 


Engliab.  ^6F  08  McOluirg. 


a- 

00 

y 

£ 

£  CONTENTS 

PART  I 

THE  TIME  OF  THE  JUDGES 

CHAPTER  I 

Introduction . 

CHAPTER  II 

The  Environment . 

CHAPTER  III 

The  Clan . . 

CHAPTER  IV 

The  Family . 

CHAPTER  V 

The  Social  Significance  of  Sacrifice  . 

CHAPTER  VI 

The  Influence  of  Individuals 


PAGJfi 

3 


.  15 


.  24 


.  32 


.  39 


47 


VI 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  VII 

Industry,  Trade,  and  Travel  . 


CHAPTER  VIII 

Characteristic  Stories 


CHAPTER  IX 

The  Religion  of  the  People  . 


CHAPTER  X 

The  Rise  of  Nationalism. 


PART  II 

THE  TIME  OF  THE  MONARCHY 

CHAPTER  I 

Literary  Sources  for  the  Period 

CHAPTER  II 

The  Changed  Environment  .... 


CHAPTER  III 


PAGE 

.  68 


.  75 


.  87 


.  95 


.  101 


.  Ill 


The  Passing  of  the  Clan 


119 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  IV 

PAGE 

The  Family  and  the  Home . 128 

CHAPTER  V 

Village  and  City  Life . 136 

CHAPTER  VI 

The  Industrial  Life . 145 

CHAPTER  VII 

Warfare . 153 

CHAPTER  VIII 

Literature  and  Education . 161 

CHAPTER  IX 

Manners  and  Morals . 169 

CHAPTER  X 

Laws  and  their  Infringement  ....  177 

CHAPTER  XI 


Sickness  and  Death 


.  196 


CONTENTS 


Till 


CHAPTER  XII 

PASS 

The  Purification  of  Yahwism  .  .  .  .207 

CHAPTER  XIII 

The  Conclusion . 225 

APPENDIX 

I.  Harmony  of  Passages  Relating  to  the  Set¬ 


tlement  . 231 

II.  The  Matriarchate . 238 

III.  The  Philistines . 239 

IV.  The  Hittites  (the  Khittim)  ....  240 

V.  The  Amorites . 241 

VI.  The  Spirit  of  Yahweh . 242 

VII.  The  Patriarchal  Stories  of  Genesis  .  .  243 

VIII.  Primitive  Covenants  among  Semitic  People  245 

INDEX . 247 


.  PART  / 


THE  TIME  OF  THE  JUDGES 


THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


CHAPTER  I 

INTRODUCTION 

The  designation  of  tlie  period  of  Hebrew  life  which 
is  considered  in  this  part  of  the  present  work  is  not 
as  easy  as  it  at  first  thought  seems,  for  the  term  here 
employed,  the  usual  one,  is  misleading,  though  per¬ 
haps  not  as  misleading  to  many  as  some  other  might 
be.  The  time  covered  is  from  the  settlement  of 
Canaan  to  the  monarchy.  This  was  a  period  when 
the  Hebrews  for  the  most  part  were  wanting  in  unity, 
when  the  clans  grouped  themselves  in  certain  parts 
of  Canaan,  revealing  in  some  instances  their  kinship, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Leah  and  Rachel  clans.  If  there 
had  been  something  akin  to  national  life  prior  to  the 
settlement,  during  their  nomadic  wanderings,  it  must 
have  grown  very  largely  out  of  the  circumstances  of 
that  life.  When  they  entered  Canaan,  as  there  will 
be  an  endeavour  to  show  later,  they  went  up  in  groups 
to  their  various  allotments  or  destinations  and  es¬ 
tablished  themselves  as  best  they  could.  Later,  on 
rare  occasions,  clan  aided  clan,  and  on  occasions  rarer 
still,  group  or  tribe  aided  some  clan  in  extremity. 
Not  apparently  until  near  the  close  of  this  period, 
when  the  Philistines,  more  capable  of  united  action 


4 


THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


than  the  Canaanites,  came  into  prominence  and  set 
themselves  to  harry  and  to  oppress  the  Hebrews,  was 
there  developed  and  manifested  some  considerable 
national  spirit.  The  clans  were  then  measurably 
drawn  together  under  Saul,  the  son  of  Kish,1  who 
stood  at  the  parting  of  the  ways,  partaking  of  the 
character  of  a  local  vindicator  or  deliverer.  He  pre¬ 
pared  the  way  for  David,  in  whom  the  monarchy  really 
had  its  origin. 

The  so-called  Judges  were  necessarily  limited  in 
influence,  both  as  to  territory  and  as  to  time.  As 
vindicators  or  deliverers  their  work  was  in  each  in¬ 
stance  confined  to  a  comparatively  small  section  of 
the  land.  When  their  work  was  done,  though  they 
may  not  have  sunk  into  obscurity,  they  ceased  to 
control  or  to  rally  and  to  lead.  Judges  they  never 
became  in  the  popular  understanding  of  the  term. 
Much,  then,  as  we  may  object  to  the  term,  “the  Time 
of  the  Judges,”  on  the  grounds  mentioned  we  still  re¬ 
tain  it. 

Scholars  are  no  longer  able  to  accept  the  chronol¬ 
ogy  of  the  Book  of  Judges.  The  figures  given  be¬ 
long  to  the  additions  made  to  the  texts  by  late  redac¬ 
tors  and  are  as  unreliable  as  are  the  statements  that 
these  different  heroes  individually  ruled  over  all 
Israel.  Instead  of  a  period  of  four  hundred  years, 

we  have  but  two  hundred  and  fifty  or  three  hun- 

•/ 

dred  years  at  most, 2  though  we  include  the  days  of 

1  The  extent  to  which  Saul,  and  later  the  House  of  Saul,  looked 
to  Benjamin  for  support  is  worthy  of  note. 

2  Budde  gives  as  the  approximate  date  of  the  Exodus,  1250  b.c.  ; 
as  the  date  of  the  invasion  of  Canaan,  1200 ;  as  that  of  the  begin- 


INTRODUCTION 


5 


Samuel  and  Saul  which,  present  substantially  the  same 
type  of  social  life. 

But  though  we,  after  bringing  this  period  down  to 
the  close  of  the  life  of  Saul,  shorten  it  as  compared 
with  the  old  chronology  one  hundred  to  one  hundred 
and  fifty  years,  we  have  to  admit  its  importance.  Not 
until  the  last  few  decades  of  Old  Testament  study  in 
the  light  of  the  higher  criticism  gave  us  our  true  per¬ 
spective  were  we  able  to  understand  the  mighty  im¬ 
port  of  those  transitional,  yet  formative,  years  of  early 
Hebrew  life.  During  this  period  the  Hebrews  ceased 
to  be  a  pastoral,  and  became  an  agricultural,  people. 
That  this  necessitated  a  momentous  change  in  their 
social  life  must  be  evident  to  all  who  are  familiar  with 
the  two  types  of  civilisation.  Then  there  were  the 
changes  that  came  from  contact  with  the  Canaanites  ; 
and  later  those  that  grew  out  of  the  hostility  and 
pressure  of  the  Philistines. 

The  old  view,  according  to  which  a  monotheistic 
people,  numbering  several  millions,  passed  into  a 
land  that  of  right  was  theirs,  exterminating  its  inhab¬ 
itants,  and,  save  for  occasional  relapses,  prospered 
and  multiplied  until  they  were  ready  for  a  king  for 
whom  they  were  so  foolish  as  to  ask,  is  discredited 
in  the  light  which  patient  investigation  has  thrown 
upon  the  period.  Instead  of  this  we  have  various 
clans,  containing  at  the  most  a  few  thousand  each, 
making  with  all  that  it  involved  socially  the  mighty 

ning  of  the  monarchy  under  David,  1000.  Kautzsch  puts  the  Exo¬ 
dus  earlier,  as  1320  b.c.  This  brings  the  invasion  into  the  early  part 
of  the  thirteenth  century  b.c.  Only  in  the  latter  date,  the  time  of 
David,  does  he  agree  with  Budde. 


6 


THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


change  from  a  nomadic  to  an  agricultural  life  while 
at  the  same  time  changing  radically  their  environ¬ 
ment.  During  this  period  ideals  and  institutions 
were  forming  that  later  played  an  important  part  in 
the  life  of  the  people,  while  at  the  same  time  they 
were  slowly  drawn  together  as  their  interests  became 
one  in  face  of  a  common  peril.  Civilised  they  did 
not,  in  our  modern  acceptation  of  the  term,  become ; 
far  from  it ;  but  they  made  great  strides  in  this  di¬ 
rection  and  secured  in  so  doing  some  intellectual 
and  moral  values  that  marked  a  decided  advance  in 
thought  and  religion. 

This  period,  then,  so  important,  is  here  studied  as 
the  earliest  period,  for  back  of  it  we  can  go  but  a 
little  way.  We  may  take  it  for  granted  that  the  He¬ 
brews  had  lived  in  Egypt  and  had  there  felt  the  lash 
of  the  task-master.  The  statement  of  Dr.  Budde  in 
The  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile ,  p.  10,  is  one  which 
we  can  readily  endorse :  “  The  Israelites  knew  that 
their  forefathers  had  been  restored  by  the  help  of 
their  God  from  Egyptian  bondage  to  the  freedom  of 
the  steppe,  and  thence  led  to  their  permanent  abode. 
The  witness  of  the  historical  documents  to  this  fact 
does  not  stand  alone.  The  earliest  prophets  pre¬ 
suppose  it  as  an  incontestable  truth.  It  is  incon¬ 
ceivable  that  a  free  people  should  have  stamped  on 
the  memory  of  their  ancestors  the  brand  of  a  dis¬ 
graceful  servitude  unless  it  had  a  foundation  of  his¬ 
torical  truth.  All  that  can  be  considered  doubtful  is 
whether  it  was  the  whole  people  of  Israel  that  fell 
under  the  Egyptian  bondage,  or  Joseph  alone.”  Ad¬ 
mitting  all  this,  we  still  have  to  confess  that  we  know 


INTRODUCTION 


7 


next  to  nothing  of  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews  dur¬ 
ing  the  time  of  their  Egyptian  sojourn  ;  but  we  may 
safely  say  that  prior  to  their  entering  Canaan  they 
had  for  a  long  time  lived  as  nomads  and  that  their 
life  for  centuries  had  presumably  been  essentially 
nomadic.  It  was  probably  as  shepherds  that  they 
were  known  even  in  Egypt.  But  though  they  lived 
as  nomads  before  entering  Canaan,  the  records  of 
their  desert  life  are  well  nigh  as  scanty  as  those  of 
the  Egyptian  period.  Of  authentic  contemporary 
literature  we  have  little.  It  is  a  well-known  fact 
that  the  material  in  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers 
that  professes  to  be  contemporary  is  largely 1  exilic, 
while  Deuteronomy  belongs  to  the  days  of  Josiah. 
With  so  little  material  at  our  disposal,  it  seems  un¬ 
wise  to  attempt  to  reconstruct  the  social  life  of  that 
period  in  a  separate  part ;  but  it  may  be  carefully 
studied  in  connection  with  the  settlement  of,  and 
later  life  in,  Canaan.  By  way  of  contrast  the  old  life 
may  in  its  more  distinctive  features  be  brought  out 
while  dwelling  upon  the  settled,  agricultural  life,  thus 
adding  to  the  interest  of  the  story  of  the  social  life  in 
the  time  of  the  Judges. 

That  the  years,  whether  forty  or  more,  passed  in 
the  desert  were  important  in  their  influence  upon  the 
Hebrew  clans,  we  must  admit.  Socially,  if  not  indus¬ 
trially,  there  must  have  been  changes  ;  but  morally 
and  religiously  the  development  must  have  been  still 
more  marked.  Whether  the  Hebrews  had  known 
God  as  one  and  as  Yaliweli  prior  to  the  Exodus,  or 

1  Not  wholly,  for  the  J  and  E  narratives  as  found  in  Exodus  and 
Numbers  treat  the  period  imaginatively. 


8 


THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


whether,  as  Budde  has  so  ably  argued,  they  through 
Moses  accepted  Yahweh,1  the  God  of  the  Kenites,  as 
their  God,  they  surely  emerged  from  their  desert  life 
as  the  people  of  Yahweh.  Up  to  this  time  the  world 
had  probably  not  seen  a  loftier  conception  of  the 
Divine  Being.  It  took  centuries  of  thought  for  the 
Hebrews  to  fill  this  concept  with  the  rich  content 
which  appears  in  the  teaching  of  Amos  and  Hosea, 
to  say  nothing  of  Isaiah  and  Deutero-Isaiah  ;  but 
even  then,  at  the  time  of  the  settlement,  there  was  a 
purity  and  an  elevation  in  their  thought  of  their  God 
that  could  have  been  found  only  in  the  deity  of  a 
nomadic  people,  and  that,  too,  a  people  peculiarly  cir¬ 
cumstanced.  By  bringing  out,  therefore,  the  distin¬ 
guishing  traits  of  the  social  life  of  the  people  while 
nomads,  in  depicting  the  social  life  of  the  time  of  the 
Judges,  the  writer  presents  the  first  of  two  parts  on 
the  social  life  of  the  Hebrew  people ;  so  that,  as  it 
lies  in  his  own  mind,  the  designation,  “  the  Social 
Life  of  the  Early  Hebrews,”  is  the  appropriate  title 
for  this  part,  though  for  reasons  above  suggested  he 
retains  the  phrase,  “the  Time  of  the  Judges.” 

It  will  be  found  necessary  in  the  progress  of  this 
w’ork  to  make  frequent  reference  to  sources  from 
which  data  have  been  obtained,  as  it  will  to  cite  mod¬ 
ern  authorities  that  corroborate  the  author  in  the 
positions  taken.  As  the  text  of  such  a  work  cannot 

1  The  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile.  As  this  is  a  prominent 
contention  of  the  earlier  chapters  of  this  volume,  these  American 
lectures  should  be  carefully  read  by  the  student  who  would  under¬ 
stand  the  question  of  the  origin  of  Yahwism.  (Cf.  also  Cornill, 
The  Prophets  of  Israel,  3d  ed.,  p.  20,  f. — Cr.) 


INTRODUCTION 


9 


be  overloaded  with  critical  discussions  or  explana¬ 
tions,  the  foot-notes  must  necessarily  be  ample,  for 
the  questions  which  will  occur  to  the  reader,  unless 
he  has  himself  worked  these  same  sources  critically, 
will  have  to  do  with  the  data  upon  which  statements 
are  based.  The  author  may  have  had  ample  his¬ 
torical  and  sociological  warrant  for  his  assertions, 
but  if  he  refers  to  such  data  it  must  be  in  the  way 
of  foot-notes  or  appendix ;  and  he  must  make  such 
references  frequently,  because,  otherwise,  his  state¬ 
ments  would  put  altogether  too  much  strain  upon  the 
credulity  of  the  reader. 

The  student  of  the  social  life  of  this  period  finds 
at  his  disposal  a  large  body  of  sociological  data  em¬ 
bedded  in  folk-lore  and  song.  These  data,  though 
invaluable,  need  to  be  very  carefully  handled  that 
the  real  and  indisputable  facts  may  be  made  to  ap¬ 
pear.  Such  student  finds  also  considerable  historical 
material  in  the  original  sources,  though  very  little 
that  belongs  to  the  age  itself.  Much  of  the  Book  of 
Judges  is  the  work  of  late  redactors  and  has  con¬ 
sequently  little  value  for  our  present  constructive 
work,  while  some  of  it  belongs  to  the  priestly  writers 
of  the  exilic  period  and  has  still  less  value.  It  is  a 
fact  that  must  be  recognised,  apt  as  some  are  to  scout 
the  thought,  that  the  student  of  to-day,  with  his  knowl¬ 
edge  of  early  Semitic  life  and  his  critical  apparatus, 
is  better  able  to  reconstruct  the  social  life  of  the 
period  under  consideration  than  was  the  Priestly 
Writer  seven  hundred  years  after  the  settlement,  or 
the  Deuteronomist  four  hundred  years  after.  To  have 
lived  five  centuries  before  Christ,  or  even  eight  cen- 


10  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

turies  before,  did  not  necessarily  render  the  Hebrew 
writer  infallible  as  to  the  early  life  of  his  people. 
Traditions  there  undoubtedly  were  in  abundance,  but 
time  had  wrought  changes  in  them ;  ample  written 
material  there  must  have  been,  though  such  material 
must  have  passed  through  strange  vicissitudes.  If 
Deuteronomist  and  Priestly  Writer  had  not  worked 
over  this  material  in  J oshua,  for  example,  from  their 
own  peculiar  point  of  view,  we  might  have  much  more 
trustworthy  data  than  we  have ;  as  it  is,  we  are  forced 
to  ignore  for  our  purposes  almost  the  whole  of  it. 
Yet  the  Book  of  Joshua,  as  we  have  it,  is  not  by  any 
means  without  value  to  the  historical  and  sociological 
student,  for  there  are  portions  that  admirably  sup¬ 
plement  the  oldest  portions  of  the  Book  of  Judges. 

But  just  what,  it  is  here  profitable  to  inquire,  have 
we  as  reliable  data  in  Joshua,  Judges,  and  1  Samuel  ? 
We  have  the  fragmentary  story  of  the  settlement 
found  in  Judges,  chap,  i.,  omitting  the  several  addi¬ 
tions  of  the  redactor,  as  the  reference  to  the  death 
of  Joshua,  v.  1,  the  reference  to  the  conquest  of 
Canaanites  and  Perizzites,  v.  4,  the  statement  con¬ 
cerning  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  v.  8,  and  that  as 
to  the  capture  of  Gaza,  Askelon,  and  Ekron,  v.  18, 
etc.1  With  this  chapter  of  Judges  we  should  com¬ 
pare  certain  fragments  from  the  same  ancient  sources 
preserved  in  the  Book  of  Joshua,  xiii.  13 ;  xv.  14-19  ; 
xv.  63 ;  xvi.  10 ;  xvii.  11-18 ;  xix.  47.2  Very  curious 
are  these  passages  embedded  in  the  text  of  Joshua, 
so  utterly  at  variance  are  they  with  the  bulk  of 
that  work.  The  second  chapter  of  Judges  informs 
1  See  Appendix  I.  *  Cf.  here  the  Septuagint. 


INTRODUCTION 


11 


us  that  the  Messenger  of  Yahweh  (the  allusion  is 
probably  to  the  Ark  which  was  carried)  went  up 
from  Gilgal  to  Bethel,  that  there  the  people  offered 
sacrifice  unto  Yahweh ;  it  tells  us  also  that  Yahweh 
left  the  people,  that  is,  the  Canaanites,  not  dispos¬ 
sessing  them  at  once ;  that  the  Israelites  dwelt  in  the 
midst  Of  them,  intermarried  with  them  and  served 
their  gods.  Aside  from  this  the  chapter  is  late. 
The  story  of  Ehud,  Judges  iii.  15-28,  must  be  con¬ 
sidered  trustworthy;  so,  too,  must  the  great  battle 
ode  of  Judges  v.  Just  what  the  story  of  the  over¬ 
throw  of  the  Canaanites  in  chap.  iv.  has  for  our  pur¬ 
poses  it  is  hard  to  say.  As  a  parallel  to  the  Song  of 
Deborah  it  is .  inferior  .  and  unreliable.  Probably 
there  was  a  story  of  the  overthrow  of  Jabin  of  Hazor 
(see  Joshua  xi.),  but  it  is  here  so  mutilated  in  the  en¬ 
deavour  to  bring  it  into  harmony  with  the  later  cam¬ 
paign  against  Sisera,  as  to  be  of  no  great  use  to  us. 
Joshua,  chap,  xi.,  may  be  more  reliable,  though  the 
text  bears  marks  of  being  worked  over.  The  folk- 
story  of  Gideon,  embedded  in  Judges,  vi.-viii.,  in  its 
oldest  form,  which,  as  used  by  us,  is  very  simple  in 
outline,  is  invaluable,  but  it  needs  to  be  studied  in 
Moore’s  Polychrome  Judges  or  in  connection  with 
Driver’s  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Tes¬ 
tament  to  be  understood  by  the  average  reader.  The 
Abimelech  story,  so  far  as  it  has  to  do  with  Gaal  ben 
Obed,  ix.  26-41,  bears  the  marks  of  extreme  antiquity ; 
of  the  remainder  there  are  portions  that  contain  so¬ 
ciological  data  of  great  value.  The  same  may  be  said 
of  the  Jephthah  story,  xi.,  xii.  Critical  scholars  are 
inclined  to  accept  the  Samson  story,  as  given  in  chap- 


12  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ters  xiii.-xvi.,  with  few  alterations.1  The  story  of 
Micah’s  idols  and  of  the  migration  of  the  Danites, 
xvii.,  xviii.,  received  many  a  touch  by  later  hand,  but 
it  bears  the  marks  in  the  main  of  a  contemporary  nar¬ 
rator.  Not  so  much  can  be  said  of  the  story  of  the 
outrage  of  Gibeah,  xix.-xxi.,  for  it  is  dual  in  form, 
yet  even  here  there  are  valuable  sociological  data. 

1  Samuel  should  not  be  neglected,  but  if  used  it 
should  be  with  such  critical  guides  as  Driver’s  In¬ 
troduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
Smith’s  Samuel ,  in  The  International  Critical  Com¬ 
mentary.  The  need  of  criticism  of  the  text  is  more 
imperative  here  than  in  the  case  of  the  Judges,  be¬ 
cause  it  has  suffered  more.  .  See  especially  passages 
in  which  Samuel  figures  prominently  as  judge  and 
theocratic  leader.  The  story  of  Saul’s  career  as  it 
comes  out  in  1  Samuel  ix.  1-10, 16  ;  xi.  1-11, 15  ;  xiii. 
and  xiv.,  also  the  Saul  and  David  stories,  with  allow¬ 
ances  for  reduplications,  etc.,  save  xix.  18-24  and  a 
few  other  passages,  should  be  studied.2 

1  These  stories  are  of  great  value  from  the  social  point  of  view, 
and  have  historical  value  as  well  (in  opposition  to  the  solar-myth 
theory),  yet  it  must  be  said  that  myth  and  legend  are  no  less  dis¬ 
tinguishable  than  the  historic  element. — Cr. 

2  The  leading  English  and  American  authorities  accessible  to  the 
reader  should  be  named,  for  he  who  tries  to  master  the  original 
sources  without  them  labours  at  a  great  disadvantage.  W.  H.  Ben¬ 
nett’s  Joshua ,  in  The  English  Polychrome  of  The  Sacred  Books  of  the 
Old  Testament ;  G.  F.  Moore’s  Judges ,  in  The  English  Polychrome 
and  in  The  International  Critical  Commentary  ;  and  Driver’s  Intro¬ 
duction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  are  indispensable. 
Among  other  works  that  help  one  to  understand  early  Hebrew  life 
are  W.  Robertson  Smith’s  Kinship  and  Marriage  and  his  The  Relig¬ 
ion  of  the  Semites  ;  H.  C.  Trumbull’s  three  volumes  :  The  Blood  Cov • 


INTRODUCTION 


13 


The  authorities  named  may  suggest  to  the  reader  a 
preference  for  the  works  of  the  higher  critics.  It  is, 
perhaps,  enough  to  say  frankly  that  the  reader  is  not 
wrong  in  his  surmise.  The  student  who  seeks  to 
master  the  social  life  of  this  very  obscure  and  difficult 
period  without  these  illuminative  guides,  sets  himself 
to  a  hopeless  task.  Only  men  thoroughly  imbued 
with  the  modern  historico-critical  spirit  are  able  to 
open  up  to  us  intelligently  in  Old  Testament  study 
the  original  sources.  All  difficulties  do  not  vanish 
under  their  leadership,  but  the  worst  and  the  most 
perplexing  do  ;  besides,  they  lift  from  the  back  of 
faith  by  their  critical  separation  and  elucidation  of 
the  texts  many  a  burden  which  faith  should  never  be 
made  to  bear.  A  study  of  the  social  life  of  the  time 
between  the  settlement  of  Canaan  and  the  monarchy 
should  not  follow  the  lines  laid  down  in  the  general 
histories.  More  and  other  data  must  be  brought  to¬ 
gether,  and  such  data  must  be  looked  at  throughout 
from  the  social  point  of  view.  This  point  of  view 
largely  determines  the  particular  topics  treated  and 
the  order  in  which  they  are  taken  up. 

cnant ,  The  Threshold  Covenant ,  and  The  Covenant  of  Salt ;  Tiele’s 
The  Science  of  Religion ;  and  Tylor’s  Primitive  Culture  and  kin¬ 
dred  studies  in  anthropology.  Besides  these  textual  and  other  works 
named,  may  be  mentioned  several  authorities  of  great  value  often 
referred  to  in  these  pages  :  Budde’s  The  Religion  of  Israel  to  the 
Exile  ;  Piepenbring’s  Histoire  du  Peuple  d' Israel ;  Ivittel’s  History 
of  the  Hebrews ;  Wellhausen’s  article  Israel  in  the  Encyclopedia 
Britannica ;  Kautzsch’s  The  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament , 
and  G.  A.  Smith’s  Historical  Geography  of  the  Holy  Land.  Hast¬ 
ings’  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  and  Cheyne  and  Black’s  Encyclopaedia 
Biblica  are  of  exceptional  value  upon  the  topics  connected  with  this 
period. 


14  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


In  this  Part  I.,  the  environment,  geographical  and 
ethnographical,  in  so  far  as  it  affected  the  social  life 
of  the  period  is  first  considered.  The  clan  is  then 
studied  as  the  primitive  form  of  social  organisation, 
and  its  influence  upon  the  life  of  the  people  noted. 
Next,  the  family  as  a  social  organism  of  growing  im¬ 
portance  is  taken  up.  This  chapter  is  in  turn  followed 
by  one  on  the  social  significance  of  sacrifice.  The  in¬ 
fluence  of  individuals  upon  the  social  life  is  consid¬ 
ered  at  length.  Industry,  trade,  and  travel,  as  they  had 
to  do  with  the  same  aspects  of  that  life,  receive  at¬ 
tention.  Some  stories  characteristic  of  the  time  are 
carefully  studied.  The  character  of  the  religion  of 
the  people  and  its  importance  as  a  social  factor  pre¬ 
cedes  a  chapter  on  the  transition  in  the  direction  of 
national  unity  toward  the  close  of  the  period. 


CHAPTER  II 


THE  ENVIRONMENT 

We  have  to  do  with  a  people  fixed  to  the  land  upon 
which  they  lived.  The  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 
after  they  settled  in  Canaan  was  not  what  it  had 
been  anterior  to  the  settlement.  Little  is  known  of 
them  up  to  this  time.  The  fragmentary  and  imper¬ 
fect  records  that  remain  in  what  purports  to  be  a  his¬ 
tory  of  their  progenitors  in  Genesis,  and  in  later  por¬ 
tions  of  the  Hexateuch  of  themselves  while  in  Egypt 
and  after  they  got  out  into  the  Arabian  peninsula, 
Avhen  freed  from  the  manifest  marks  of  late  prophetic 
and  priestly  historians,  leave  us  in  great  uncertainty. 
But  that  they  were  a  nomadic  people  beyond  the  J or- 
dan,  before  they  entered  Canaan,  living  as  shepherds 
or  herdsmen,  unsettled  and  migratory,  without  private 
property  in  land,  cultivating  the  ground  but  little  if  at 
all,  subsisting  for  the  most  part  upon  their  flocks  and 
herds,  with  customs  that  differed  not  materially  from 
those  of  later  nomads  of  Arabia,  is  indisputable.  That 
this  old  social  order  very  largely  disappeared,1  giving 
place  slowly  in  some  regions,  more  rapidly  in  others, 
as  they  with  considerable  difficulty  crowded  in  and 
took  possession  of  unoccupied  regions,2  or  dispos- 

1  Kittel,  His.  of  the  Heb .,  vol.  ii.,  p.  93;  Hastings’  Diet,  of  the 
Bib.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  807 ff. 

2  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex.,  p.  48  ff.  ;  cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  29,  30,  with 
Judges  ii.  23a;  iii.  2. 


15 


16  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


sessed  some  of  the  weaker  hill-folk  west  of  the  Jor¬ 
dan,  we  must  also  believe.  They  became  an  agricult¬ 
ural  people,  having  homes  of  their  own  in  villages 
and  cities,  though  still  to  a  considerable  extent  cling¬ 
ing  to  their  flocks,  practising  not  only  the  art  of 
husbandry  but  also  those  closely  allied  thereto,  the 
making  of  wine,  oil,  etc. 

In  this  chapter  we  are  interested  in  the  environment 
of  their  new  social  life,  physical,  intellectual,  and  spirit¬ 
ual.  The  various  clans  in  three  main  and  practically 
independent  divisions  or  movements  pushed  up  from 
the  plain  of  the  Jordan  where,  near  Gilgal  and  Jeri¬ 
cho  which  had  fallen  into  their  hands,  they  had  lived 
for  some  time  after  crossing  the  river.  One  com¬ 
pany  made  its  way  up  into  the  hill  country  of  the 
south,  another,  consisting  of  two  large  and  two  small 
clans,  secured  the  highlands  of  Central  Canaan,  the 
third,  with  little  show  of  conquest,  advanced  into  the 
hill  country  of  the  north.  Beginning  with  the  south 
and  passing  to  the  extreme  north, we  shall  sketch,  as 
far  as  our  imperfect  data  enable  us,  the  ethnographical 
and  geographical  environment  of  the  different  clans.1 

Western  Palestine  had  for  centuries  upon  its 
south  the  Edomites  and  the  Amalekites.  With  the 
former,  according  to  apparently  authentic  tradition, 
the  Hebrews  were  allied  in  race  but  at  times  involved 
in  war.  This  need  not  seem  strange,  for  the  Edom¬ 
ites  inhabited  a  rocky,  and  for  the  most  part  bar¬ 
ren  territory,  and  therefore  depended  largely  upon 

1  For  a  harmony  of  passages  relating  to  the  settlement,  see  Ap¬ 
pendix  I.  For  Philistines,  Appendix  III. ;  for  Hittite,  IV.  ;  for 
Amorites,  V. 


THE  ENVIRONMENT 


17 


the  plunder  of  caravans  for  a  subsistence.  With 
the  latter  there  was  perpetual  enmity  and  hostil¬ 
ity.  Farther  up  we  find  upon  our  left  hand  the 
small  clan  of  Simeon  living  in  close  relations  with 
another  and  stronger  Leah  clan,  that  of  Judah.  To 
our  right  and  still  farther  on  we  find  the  Kenites  and 
the  Calebites.  The  Kenites  were  perhaps  a  clan  of  the 
Amalekites  inhabiting  the  wilderness  of  Judea,  and, 
unlike  their  parent  clan,  on  most  friendly  terms  as  a 
semi-nomadic  people  with  J udah  and  his  other  allied 
clans.  The  Calebites,  apparently  a  clan  of  the  Edom¬ 
ites,  settled  in  Hebron  and  the  country  to  the  south 
thereof.  The  friendly  terms  upon  which  the  Kenites 
lived  with  Israel  appears  in  the  tradition  which  is  a 
part  of  the  J  document  of  the  Hexateuch  that  Hobab 
was  Moses’  father-in-law  ;  just  as  the  friendly  rela¬ 
tions  subsisting  between  Midian  and  Israel  at  an 
earlier  time  found  expression  in  E  and  D  in  the  tra¬ 
dition  that  Jethro  of  Midian  was  father-in-law  of 
Moses.1  In  the  region  north  of  that  occupied  by  the 
clan  of  Caleb  we  come  upon  the  clan  of  Judah  hold¬ 
ing  the  highlands  of  Southern  Canaan,  with,  probably, 
such  towns  as  Tekoah,  Bethlehem,  and  Succoth  in 
their  hands,  but  not  the  city  of  Jerusalem,2  which  to 
the  time  of  David  was  held  by  the  Jebusites,  and 
not  the  cities  of  Kirjath-Jearim,  Aijalon,  and  Gibeon 
to  the  northwest.  In  a  narrow  and  unfertile  region 
to  the  northeast  of  Jerusalem  we  find  the  clan  of 
Benjamin,  closely  affiliated  with  the  clans  of  Joseph 

1  Moore,  Judges ,  I.  C .,  pp.  32,  33  ;  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex., 
pp.  19-23. 

2  Josh.  xv.  63;  2  Samuel  v.  6-9  ;  Judges  i.  8,  21. 


18  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

as  a  part  of  an  older  clan,  that  of  Rachel.  North  of 
Beth-shemesh,  then  and  long  after  a  Canaanite  city, 
and  south  of  the  vale  of  Aijalon,  occupying  the  towns 
of  Eshtaol  and  Zorah  and  the  immediately  contiguous 
country,  we  find  the  little  clan  of  Dan  of  the  Bilhah- 
Rachel  clan  or  group,  and  so  on  friendly  terms  with 
its  near  neighbour  Ephraim.  Before  the  days  of  the 
Judges  pass  we  shall  see  this  clan,  or  the  larger  part 
of  it,  six  hundred  men  with  their  wives  and  children, 
disheartened  by  the  pressure  of  the  Canaanites,  who 
would  not  allow  them  to  spread  out  in  the  plain  be¬ 
low  toward  the  Mediterranean,  making  their  way  to 
a  beautiful  and  fertile  region  at  the  sources  of  the 
Jordan.1  The  extent  of  the  hill  territory  held  by 
the  great  clans  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  and  the 
fact  that  Ephraim  had  within  or  near  its  limits  the 
old  sanctuaries  of  Bethel  and  Shiloh,  as  wrell  as  the 
more  important  Canaanite  sanctuary  of  Shechem, 
which  was  in  the  centre  of  Ephraim  though  not  un¬ 
der  the  control  of  the  Ephraimites,  as  well  as  the  nu¬ 
merical  superiority  of  these  Joseph  clans,  give  the 
central  part  of  Canaan  peculiar  interest.  If  Judah 
seems  the  more  important  because  of  its  history 
for  two  centuries  prior  to  the  Captivity,  as  also 
because  of  its  history  subsequent  thereto,  we  need  to 
remember  that  at  this  time  it  was  relatively,  as  com¬ 
pared  with  the  other  prominent  clans,  a  much  smaller 
clan,  possessing  a  much  smaller  territory  and  consid¬ 
erably  isolated,  because  separated  from  the  clans  of 
Joseph  by  a  Canaanite  region  with  strongly  fortified 

1  Smith,  His.  Geo.  Holy  Land ,  pp.  220,  473,  480  f.  Cheyne  and 
Black,  Encye.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  992  ff. 


THE  ENVIRONMENT 


19 


cities.  The  clans  of  Joseph  had  to  content  themselves 
with  their  highlands.  Cities  on  their  border  and  in 
the  plain  below  them  easily  held  their  own  for  cen¬ 
turies,  keeping  even  their  dependencies  out  of  the 
hands  of  these  invaders.  From  Beth-shean  and  her 
dependencies,  passing  through  Ibleam,  Taanach,  and 
Megiddo,  with  their  dependencies,  to  Dor  upon  the 
Mediterranean,  south  of  Carmel,  was  a  line  of  strong 
Canaanite  centres  that  remained  unsubjugated  until 
the  time  of  David,  and  that  continued  to  be  predomi¬ 
natingly  heathen  until  long  after.1  These  cities  were 
strategic  ones  situated  in  or  near  the  great  plain  of 
Esdraelon.  Peopled  as  they  were  by  the  native  Ca- 
naanites,  they  separated  the  third  section  of  Israel 
from  the  remainder. 

The  northern  clans  need  not  long  detain  us.  They 
still  more  imperfectly  seized  the  land  whither  they 
went,  that  known  later  as  lower  and  upper  Galilee, 
as  the  stronger  clans  elected  to  make  homes  for  them¬ 
selves  in  Central  and  Southern  Canaan.  Issachar 
settled  between  the  great  plain  and  the  lake  of  Gali¬ 
lee,  not  far  from  the  clan  of  Manasseh.  Zebulun 
fixed  upon  the  territory  to  the  north  of  the  plain  and 
Issachar.  Asher,  as  a  clan,  settled  still  farther  to  the 
north  and  west,  endeavouring  to  work  his  way  down 
to  the  seaside  while  holding  on  to  what  he  was  able  to 
secure  of  the  West  Lebanon  region ;  Naphtali  settled 
to  the  right,  in  a  region  stretching  off  toward  the  sea 
of  Galilee.  This  fertile  region  of  the  well-watered 

1  Judges  i.  27;  Moore,  Judges ,  P.,  p.  50.  (Here  and  elsewhere 
P.  is  used  for  the  English  Polychrome  as  I.  C.  is  for  the  Interna 
tional  Critical  Commentary .) 


20  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

•  -  # 

hills  of  Galilee,  thus  partially  occupied  by  this  third 
wave  or  migration,  was  so  imperfectly  secured  that 
even  after  their  victories  over  Jabin  and  Sisera  these 
northern  clans  seem  to  have  largely  lost  themselves 
through  mingling  with  the  Canaanites,  so  that  they 
played  a  subordinate  part  in  the  later  history  of 
Israel.  The  unimportant  clans  of  Reuben  and  Gad 1 
to  the  east  of  the  Jordan  will  find  small  place  in  our 
study. 

It  is  thus  evident  that  the  territory  possessed  by 
these  clans  of  nomads  for  several  centuries  after  they 
had  left  behind  them  their  nomadic  life  was  small. 
Save  perhaps  in  the  case  of  Ephraim,  it  was  to  a 
considerable  extent  Canaanitish,  while  all  about  and 
among  these  Israelites  were  Canaanites,  a  Semitic  peo¬ 
ple  like  themselves  and  much  further  advanced  in  the 
arts  of  life  as  town  dwellers  and  agriculturalists  than 
they  were.  There  had  been  some  fighting,  as  there 
was  to  be  more,  but  for  the  most  part  the  settlement 
(we  refuse  to  use  the  term  conquest  here)  had  been 
bloodless,  not  because  the  Israelites,  being  fearless, 
independent  men  of  the  desert  were  less  warlike,  but 
rather  because  the  Canaanites  were  so  much  more 
numerous  and  so  much  further  advanced  in  the  arts 
of  life,  as  was  seen  in  their  well -fortified  cities.  In 
another  direction  the  Canaanites  had  the  advantage 
of  the  Hebrews ;  they,  at  least  those  inhabiting  the 
cities  of  the  plains,  had  horses  and  chariots  of  war. 
The  Hebrew  clans  had  neither.  Only  to  a  very 
limited  extent  then  was  there  a  conquest.  Self-in¬ 
vited,  the  Hebrews  as  Semitic  desert  clans  pressed 
‘Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  76  ff. 


THE  ENVIRONMENT 


21 


in,  and  took  up  their  abode  among  the  hills  in  regions 
that  the  agricultural  Canaanites  had  probably  left 
unsettled.  They  needed  not  an  extensive  territory, 
for  they  were  not  great  in  point  of  numbers.  The 
40,000  mentioned  in  the  Song  of  Deborah  probably 
included  most  of  the  fighting  men  of  Israel  at  the 
time.  The  territory  they  needed  they  appear  to  have 
secured  without  much  bloodshed. 

We  have  ceased  to  extenuate  the  stories  of  the 
slaughter  of  the  Canaanites  found  in  the  Book  of 
Joshua  and  elsewhere,  because  we  now  know  that 
there  were  no  such  pitilessly  cruel  wars.1  The 
stories  of  the  two  campaigns  attributed  to  Joshua, 
which,  according  to  the  accounts  of  them,  extermi¬ 
nated  the  Canaanites  and  gave  Israel  an  unoccupied 
stage  upon  which  to  play  his  part,  are  irreconcilable 
with  the  history  of  the  time  of  the  Judges,  when  the 
Canaanites  are  so  superior  in  numbers  to  the  He¬ 
brews. 

Outside  of  Canaan  were  the  Amalekites,  the  Mid- 
ianites,  and  other  nomadic  peoples  of  the  desert  to 
the  south  and  east  to  trouble  them  as  they  multiplied 
and  increased  in  importance.  Even  the  Moabites 
and  Ammonites  across  the  Jordan,  in  East  Palestine, 
were  to  imperil  them,  while  later,  at  the  close  of 
the  period  considered,  the  Philistines  were  to  estab¬ 
lish  themselves  in  the  western  plain  and,  spreading 
forth  as  an  enterprising  and  fairly  well  civilised  and 
warlike  people,  were  to  harass  them  and  leave  them 
at  the  time  of  the  formation  of  the  kingdom  under 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  807  ;  Piepenbring,  His.  du 
Peu.  d'Is p.  69  ff. 


22  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Saul  greatly  disorganised,  tribally  and  socially.  The 
great  Hittite  power  on  the  north,  which  perhaps  be¬ 
cause  of  its  might  as  compared  with  this  feeble  folk, 
could  afford  to  do  so,  was  for  the  most  part  to  ignore 
them.  If  there  were  invasions  of  the  Hittites  during 
this  period,  the  Canaanites  probably  suffered  far  more 
than  the  Hebrews.  That  there  was  a  great  movement 
on  the  part  of  Egypt  against  the  Hittites,  in  which  the 
Egyptians  were  successful,  seems  clear,  but  that  the 
Hebrews  suffered  comparatively  little,  seems  also 
probable.  Though  they  were  poorly  organised  and 
to  a  considerable  extent  unable  to  protect  themselves, 
this  period  of  their  history  must  have  been,  on  the 
whole,  one  of  expansion  and  normal  growth. 

The  climate  of  Palestine,  owing  to  the  salubrious 
breezes  both  from  the  western  sea  and  from  the 
northern  mountains,  made  it  possible  for  the  Israel¬ 
ites  to  develop  among  the  hills  which  they  occupied 
a  healthy  physique.  George  Adam  Smith  has  pointed 
out,  however,  that  the  Deuteronomist  was  right,  when 
several  centuries  later  he  reminded  his  people  that 
there  was  no  inevitableness  about  their  land,  as  in  the 
case  of  Egypt ; 1  that  it  taught  them  their  providential 
dependence  upon  their  God,  to  whom  as  labourers  or 
agriculturalists  they  must  look  for  such  climatic  con¬ 
ditions  as  insured  success. 

Though  undoubtedly  inferior  morally,  the  Canaan¬ 
ites  were  certainly  intellectually  and  industrially  the 
superior  of  the  Israelites.2  In  contact  with  the  Hit- 

1  Deut  xi. ;  Geo.  A.  Smith,  His.  Geo.  of  the  II.  L .,  p.  73  f. 

2  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  510;  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  Ex., 
pp.  11,  55  ;  Kittel,  His.  of  Ileb vol.  ii. ,  p.  94. 


THE  ENVIRONMENT 


99 

JjO 

tites  on  the  north  and  with  Egypt  on  the  southwest, 
and  moulded  as  they  were  by  the  learning  and  culture 
of  Babylonia  on  the  east,  while  they  were  allied  to, 
and  in  close  industrial  relation  with,  the  enterprising 
Phoenicians  of  the  northwest,  the  Canaanites  were  able 
to  influence  strongly  these  men  of  the  desert,  who 
must  have  looked  up  to  them  and  have  shown  an 
eagerness  to  learn  of  them.  The  contact  of  these  He¬ 
brew  clans  with  the  Canaanites  was  far  from  being  an 
unmitigated  evil. 

This,  then,  was  the  environment  of  these  clans 
which  according  to  tradition  passed  with  Joshua  over 
the  Jordan ;  and  this  we  shall  find  was  to  make  its 
influence  felt  in  determining  the  arts,  the  customs, 
and  to  some  extent,  possibly  to  a  great  extent,  the 
religion,  if  not  well  nigh  the  whole  life  of  this  most 
interesting  people. 


CHAPTER  III 


THE  CLAN 

More  important  than  the  family  as  a  social  organ¬ 
ism  in  primitive  times  among  the  Semites,  in  its 
influence  upon  and  its  power  over  life,  was  the  clan. 
Despite  the  position  taken  by  the  great  anthropolo¬ 
gists  and  sociologists  of  two  or  three  decades  ago,  we 
are  coming,  under  the  guidance  of  later  investigators, 
to  see  that  primitive  man  was  dominated  very  largely 
by  the  clan,  while  the  family  in  its  influence  upon  him 
played  a  subordinate  part.  The  clan  as  an  organisa¬ 
tion  seems  to  have  antedated  the  family.  Primitive 
man  probably  lived  under  a  matriarchate.1  Kinship 
was  constituted  by  uterine  ties,  and  descent  was 
reckoned  through  female  lines,  the  father’s  relation 
to  his  children  being  ignored.  Traces  of  this  origin 
of  the  Hebrew  clan  may  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  the 
harlot  had  apparently  some  social  position,  and  in 
such  names  as  Leah,  Rachel,  Zilpah,  and  Bilhah,  which 
among  the  Hebrews  were  apparently  clan  names. 
What  are  called  the  sadiqa  marriages  of  the  period  of 
the  Judges  point  in  the  same  direction.  A  study  of 
early  Arabian  life,  though  such  study  cannot  by  any 
means  take  us  back  to  the  time  under  consideration, 
may  be  regarded  as  revealing  not  only  the  conditions 

1  Appendix  II. 

24 


THE  CLAN 


25 


that  existed  in  the  centuries  immediately  antedating 
Mohammed,  but  also  with  tolerable  accuracy  the  con¬ 
ditions  for  many  centuries  anterior  thereto.  It  points 
in  the  same  direction.  In  those  times,  as  Robertson 
Smith  has  shown,  the  family  was  subordinate  to  the 
clan.  Industry,  religion,  marriage,  and  nearly  the 
whole  social  life  of  the  people,  came  under  the  sur¬ 
veillance  of  the  clan.  Property  rights  were  vested  in 
the  clan,  and  only  the  clan  had  any  legal  existence 
practically.  A  man  might  marry  without  the  clan 
only  upon  such  terms  as  the  clan  might  permit  by  its 
customs  or  by  its  action  in  a  particular  case ;  a  wom¬ 
an  might  be  allowed,  where  compensation  was  made, 
to  marry  and  leave  her  clan,  or  she  might  contract 
through  father  or  other  male  relative  with  a  man  of 
another  clan,  a  sadiqa  union  or  marriage,1  and  so  re¬ 
main  with  her  people  and  bear  children  for  her  clan. 
Unmistakable  traces  of  such  unions  of  members  of 
different  clans  are  found  in  the  old  folk-lore  tales  of 
the  Book  of  Judges.  Jerubbaal  contracted,  according 
to  story,  a  sadiqa  alliance  with  a  Canaanite  woman  of 
Shechem,  to  whom  Abimelech  was  born.2  As  the  fruit 
of  such  a  marriage  Abimelech  was  supposed  to  belong 
to  the  Shechemites.  He  took  advantage  of  this  fact 
in  seeking  to  win  over  the  men  of  Shechem.  The 
Samson  story  in  its  simplest  form  is  probably  very 
old.  In  it  the  Canaanites  of  the  plain  southwest  of 
the  vale  of  Aijalon,  in  or  near  which  dwelt  the  clan  of 
Dan,  must  have  figured  rather  than  the  Philistines, 
who  later  came  into  this  region.  This  semi-mythical 

1  W.  R.  Smith,  Kin.  and  Mar. 

*  Judges  viii.  31;  ix.  1  if. ;  Moore,  Judges ,  /.  <7.,  pp.  235  ff.,  340. 


26  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Danite  is  said  to  have  contracted  with  a  woman  of 
Timnatli  such  an  alliance,  which  was  not,  however, 
maintained  because  of  her  breach  of  faith  in  giving 
to  the  Timnathites  the  answer  to  his  riddle.  In  the 
same  way,  though  marriage  was  usually  between  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  same  clan,  unions  may  have  been  formed 
between  members  of  the  different  clans  among  the 
Hebrews  themselves.  This  seems  the  more  likely 
from  the  fact  that  among  these  clans,  as  among  the 
Arabs  at  a  much  later  day,  there  were  women  who  as 
harlots  received  into  their  tents  or  dwellings  men  of 
other  clans  and  were  not  looked  upon  with  disfavour, 
because  they  bore  children  to  their  clans.  The 
strength  of  the  family  tie  among  the  early  Hebrews 
as  known  to  us  may  be  admitted  in  spite  of  the  pre¬ 
dominance  of  the  clan  even  at  this  time.  Never  ap¬ 
parently  among  the  Hebrews  was  the  family  tie  as 
loose  as  in  Arabia,  where  the  husband  would  put  a  fa¬ 
vourite  wife  with  her  tent  at  the  disposal  of  his  guest.1 
But  despite  the  growing  importance  of  the  family  the 
clan  at  the  time  of  the  settlement  had  great  impor¬ 
tance  in  their  eyes,  and  life  was  lived  chiefly  with  a 
view  to  its  aggrandisement.  As  the  clan  developed  it 
became  incorporated  in  great  tribes,  and  the  family,  as 
the  tribe  increased  in  size,  became  of  more  importance 
as  a  social  organisation,  but  even  then  new  clans  were 
formed  within  the  tribal  group,  and  others  incorpor¬ 
ated  from  without. 

1  This  custom  is  said  to  have  held  among  the  Arabs  to  within  the 
present  century.  Probably,  in  most  instances,  an  honorarium  was 
expected  of  the  guest  who  had  made  such  use  of  a  wife’s  tent  ;  but 
it  appears  not  to  have  been  always. 


THE  CLAN 


27 


So  important  was  a  man’s  standing  in  his  clan  that 
if  he  was  cast  out  he  perforce  became  an  outlaw,  un¬ 
less,  indeed,  some  clan  could  be  found  to  receive  him. 
This  seems  to  have  been  the  case  with  Jephthah 
who,  being  cast  out  of  his  own  clan,  probably  not  be¬ 
cause  he  was  the  son  of  a  harlot,  for  that  would  not  have 
imperilled  his  standing,  but  for  other  reasons,  got  to¬ 
gether  a  lot  of  rough  and  lawless  men,  as  David  did 
later  under  similar  circumstances,  and  lived  a  life  of 
outlawry  in  the  land  of  Tob.  After  the  settlement  of 
Canaan  the  clan  must  have  changed  somewhat,  if,  in¬ 
deed,  it  did  not  slowly  degenerate  as  an  organisation. 
Hostile  influences  were  probably  at  work  tending  to 
transform  it,  but  the  disorganised  condition  of  soci¬ 
ety  must,  at  times,  in  some  ways,  have  increased  the 
allegiance  of  members  to  their  clan. 

These  different  clans  had  their  chiefs  or  leaders ; 
probably  they  had  compact  and  easily  working  civil 
and  military  organisations.  In  the  Song  of  Deborah 
there  is  an  allusion  to  Reuben  that  has  been  thought 
to  refer  not  without  reason  to  something  akin  to  an 
assembly  of  proprietors,  or  freemen,  who  discussed 
the  question  of  joining  Issachar,  Zebulun,  and  other 
northern  clans  in  a  campaign  against  Sisera.  These, 
however,  being  too  far  away  to  be  greatly  interested 
personally,  let  the  time  pass  in  indecisive  talk,  and 
failed  to  respond.  This  was  probably  a  communal 
or  clan  assembly  of  freemen. 

Some  clans  at  the  time  of  the  settlement  seem  to 
have  been  disorganised,  some  to  have  been  broken  up 
and  wholly  or  partially  incorporated  with  other  clans. 
The  story  found  in  Judges  xx.  and  xxi.  which  relates 


28  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


an  experience  in  which  the  clan  of  Benjamin  was 
shattered,  must  have  back  of  it  a  kernel  of  truth.  In 
some  way  the  neighbouring  clans  seem  to  have  been 
incensed  against  Benjamin,  because,  it  may  be,  that 
,  clan  claimed  or  sought  the  hegemony.  The  Shechem 
story  recorded  in  Genesis  xxxiv.,  which  appears  to 
have  as  its  basis  the  story  of  the  violating  of  the 
Canaanite  sanctuary  at  that  place,  may  account  for 
the  broken  condition  of  Simeon  and  Levi ; 1  the  latter 
losing  in  some  way,  as  the  history  of  the  time  reveals, 
its  organisation  as  a  clan,  the  former  playing,  as  the 
same  history  shows,  but  a  subordinate  part  in  the 
actual  life  of  Israel.  None  of  the  folk-lore  tales  of 
the  Hebrews  is  more  puzzling  than  this  old  Genesis 
story.  In  the  fragmentary  form  in  which  it  has  been 
preserved,  the  sons  of  Jacob  appear  in  an  unenviable 
light,  though  of  the  two  widely  divergent  forms  of 
the  narrative  which  are  interwoven,  one  relieves  the 
Israelites  somewhat  from  blame  by  presenting  an  ex¬ 
cuse  for  the  massacre  that  might  reasonably  be  pled 
in  these  rough  times. 

A  daughter  of  the  patriarch  Jacob,  according  to  one 
of  the  narratives,  is  taken  by  Shechem,  the  son  of 
Hamor,  and  robbed  of  her  virginal  purity.2  While 

1  Kittel,  His.  of  the  Heb .,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  69,  70;  Budde,  Eel. 
of  Is.  to  Ex .,  pp.  82  f.,  84  ff.  ;  Encyc.  Brit .,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  400;  vol. 
xiv.,  p.  487;  vol.  xxii. ,  p.  77;  Moore,  Judges ,  I.  (7.,  pp.  85-37, 
etc.;  Dillmann,  Genesis ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  287  ff. 

2  This  is  the  J  version  of  the  story,  while  the  one  given  later  is 
according  to  E.  Bacon,  Gen.  of  Gen .,  p.  177  ff. ;  cf.  Dillmann,  Gen¬ 
esis,  here.  It  should  here  be  remarked  that  J,  or  the  Jehovistic  nar¬ 
rative,  usually  regarded  as  originating  in  Judah,  and  E,  or  the  Elo- 
hist,  usually  supposed  to  have  originated  in  Ephraim,  and  P,  or  the 


THE  CLAN 


29 


still  detaining  her  in  the  city,  Shechem  comes  to  have 
a  real  fondness  for  her.  “  His  soul,”  in  the  force¬ 
ful  words  of  the  old  chronicler,  “  cleaves  to  her.” 
Jacob  and  his  sons  are  highly  incensed  over  the  out¬ 
rage,  but  they  hold  their  peace,  and,  later  when 
Shechem  seeks  to  make  her  his  by  marriage,  prom¬ 
ising  in  addition  to  his  bridal  present  to  the  girl  a 
rich  gift  to  them,  be  the  price  they  please  to  set 
upon  her  what  it  may,  if  only  she  can  be  made  his 
lawful  wife,  they  gladly  acquiesce,  because  of  his  de¬ 
light  in  the  girl  and  because  of  his  high  position 
among  the  sons  of  Hamor.  It  is  not  until  afterward 
that  there  is  treachery,  and  then  only  on  the  part  of 
Simeon  and  Levi,  sons  of  Jacob  by  Leah.  They  go 
forth  and  slay,  not  the  inhabitants  of  the  city,  but 
Shechem  and  his  father,  and  bring  forth  their  sister, 
together  with  the  spoil  of  the  House  of  Hamor. 
Though  nothing  is  done  to  them,  they  are  rebuked 
by  the  father,  who  is  not  so  much  incensed  against 
them  because  of  their  perfidy  as  he  is  made  fearful 
lest  he  and  his  household,  being  “made  to  stink 
among  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,”  may  be  exter¬ 
minated.  But  their  excuse  that  Shechem  had  dealt 
with  their  sister  as  with  a  harlot  stops  the  mouth  of 
the  patriarch. 

Curiously  interwoven  with  this  story  is  another 
which  reflects  more  favourably  the  feeling  which  the 
violation  of  the  city  of  Shechem  engendered,  though 
the  blame  of  it  is  not,  for  some  unaccountable  reason, 

Priestly  narrative,  were  the  great  sources  from  which  our  Hexa- 
teuch,  the  first  six  books  of  our  Bible,  Judges  and  Samuel  were 
very  largely  compiled. 


30  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

put  upon  the  two  sons  or  clans  alone.  According  to 
this  narrative,  which  belongs  to  the  Ephraimite  his¬ 
tory  of  early  Israel  as  the  other  belongs  to  the  Judah- 
ite,  the  daughter  of  the  patriarch,  urged  by  curioshy, 
goes  forth  to  see  her  neighbour’s  daughters.  She  is 
seen  by  Shechem,  who  is  at  once  attracted  and  speaks 
kindly  to  her.  Afterward,  in  accordance  with  the 
custom  of  the  early  Semites,  he  begs  his  father  to  get 
the  damsel  as  his  wife.  The  father  visits  the  sons  of 
Jacob  in  order  to  establish  a  friendly  covenant  be¬ 
tween  them  which  shall  permit  intermarriage  and  the 
right  of  habitation  and  trade  with  the  Israelites.  The 
Israelites  refuse,  because  the  Hamorites  are  uncir¬ 
cumcised.  Only  upon  condition  that  they  be  circum¬ 
cised  will  they  accede.  The  word  which  is  carried 
back  to  the  city  by  Hamor  pleases  the  Shechemites, 
as  it  does  his  son.  But  having  submitted  to  the  rite, 
they  are,  while  still  physically  incapacitated,  set 
upon  by  the  sons  of  Jacob,  who  slay  them  and 
make  spoil  of  their  city,  carrying  off  their  flocks  and 
herds  and  asses,  as  well  as  what  was  in  the  city  and 
in  the  country,  together  with  their  wives  and  little 
ones.1 

A  fragmentary  and  imperfect  folk-lore  tale  is  this, 
containing,  as  does  the  Judaliite  story,  a  basis  of  fact. 
We  may  be  reasonably  sure  that  Shechem  was  taken 
and  spoiled  by  the  clans  of  Simeon  and  Levi.  That 
it  was  so  may  be  seen  in  a  stanza  from  one  of  the 
most  ancient  of  Israel’s  poetic  fragments,  which  be¬ 
longs  probably  to  the  period  of  the  early  part  of  the 
monarchy  in  the  ninth  or  tenth  century  B.c. 

1  For  patriarchal  stories  of  Genesis  see  Appendix  VII. 


THE  CLAN 


31 


Simeon  and  Levi  are  brethren  ; 

Weapons  of  violence  are  their  swords. 

O  my  soul,  come  not  thou  into  their  council ; 

Unto  their  assembly,  my  glory,  be  not  thou  united ; 

For  in  their  anger  they  slew  a  man, 

And  in  their  selfwill  they  houghed  an  ox. 

Cursed  be  their  anger,  for  it  was  fierce  ; 

And  their  wrath,  for  it  was  cruel ; 

I  will  divide  them  in  Jacob, 

And  scatter  them  in  Israel. 1 

It  does  not  require  a  severely  trained  critical  sense 
to  discover  in  this  impassioned  poetry  the  terrible  in¬ 
dignation  with  which  certain  of  the  Hebrew  clans  re- 

O 

garded  some  impious  deeds  of  treachery  by  the  clans 
of  Simeon  and  Levi.  Whatever  one  may  think  of  this 
story  and  of  the  selection  quoted  from  the  Blessing  of 
Jacob2  herewith  given,  he  can  hardly  fail  to  notice 
the  small  part  taken  by  Simeon  in  the  history  of  the 
time,  as  he  cannot  fail  to  see  that  the  Levites  appear 
during  the  period  of  the  Judges  without  any  sem¬ 
blance  of  tribal  life.  All  this,  however,  should  not 
lead  us  to  overlook  more  important  data.  The  note¬ 
worthy  thing  which  the  early  literature  of  the  He¬ 
brews  brings  out  is  that  several  of  their  clans  had 
a  compact  and  workable  organisation,  and  one  so  self- 
sufficient  that  they  were  able  to  maintain  themselves 
and  make  their  influence  felt  upon  their  members  for 
centuries. 


1  Gen.  xlix.  5-7. 


2  Gen.  xlix.  2-27. 


CHAPTEK  IV 


THE  FAMILY 

The  most  interesting  social  institution  among  these 
clans,  and  the  one  that  promised  most  for  the  future 
of  Israel,  was  the  family.1  Though  subordinate  to 
the  clan  in  many  respects,  it  was  destined  to  grow  in 
importance.  As  the  clans  became  larger  and  more 
unwieldy,  and  as  they  were  slowly  drawn  nearer  and 
nearer  into  something  akin  to  a  national  life,  the  fam¬ 
ily  acquired  a  self-sufficiency  and  local  importance 
it  had  not  hitherto  possessed. 

In  a  study  of  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews  of  any 
period  of  their  history,  the  question  concerning 
woman’s  position  is  a  vital  one.  Though  inferior  at 
this  time  to  what  it  was  later,  it  was  one  of  consider¬ 
able  importance.  There  is  probably  little  literary  ma¬ 
terial  in  the  old  Hebrew  Scriptures  that  is  older  than 
the  so-called  Song  of  Deborah.  It  bears  the  marks  of 
having  been  written  at  or  near  the  time  of  the  over¬ 
throw  of  Sisera  by  the  northern  clans,  though  it  prob¬ 
ably  was  not  the  work  of  Deborah  herself.  It  reveals 
the  fact  that  this  remarkable  woman  was  able  to  play 
a  conspicuous  part  in  that  conflict.  The  passage 
•which  represents  her  as  being  of  the  clan  of  Ephraim, 

'Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  i. ,  p.  846  ff. ;  Kittel,  His .  of  Heb 
vol.  ii.,  p.  298  f. 


32 


THE  FAMILY 


S3 


as  residing  under  the  palm-tree  of  Deborah  near 
Bethel,  and  as  judging  Israel  many  years,  is  unrelia¬ 
ble  ;  but  that  this  woman  did  incite  and  vindicate 
Israel,  much  as  did  the  other  Judges,  seems  evident. 
That  in  those  troublous,  turbulent  times  a  woman 
could  gain  so  much  influence,  thus  making  for  herself 
a  name  that  was  celebrated  in  the  songs  of  her  peo¬ 
ple,  is  significant.  The  place  assigned  to  the  wife  of 
Manoah  in  the  old  folk-tale  of  *  Samson  and  that  oc¬ 
cupied  by  Hannah  in  the  later  story  of  Samuel  is 
suggestive  of  woman’s  position.  It  is  the  woman 
who  first  receives  an  intimation  of  the  birth  of  a  child 
who  is  to  be  devoted  to  Yahweh.  And  when  she 
takes  her  husband  into  confidence,  it  is  the  woman 
who  is  again  approached  by  the  Messenger  of 
Yahweh.  Samson,  upon  reaching  a  marriageable 
age,  communes  with  both  his  father  and  his  mother. 
They  are  requested  to  get  the  young  woman  of  Tim- 
nath  for  him.  The  father,  as  the  party  that  must 
make  all  marriage-contracts  for  his  sons,  unless  this 
is  done  by  the  clan,  replies  and  refuses  the  request ; 
but  later  at  the  wedding  when  the  hero  of  the  tale 
speaks  to  the  young  woman  of  the  riddle,  he  assures 
her  that  he  has  not  taken  his  father  and  mother  into 
confidence.  The  writer  leaves  us  to  infer  that  had  he 
told  anyone  he  would  have  told  his  parents.  The 
tradition  concerning  Abimelech’s  death  discloses  the 
fact  that  women  were  wont  to  bear  a  part  in  defensive 
warfare,  as  we  know  they  did  in  industrial  affairs.  In 
this  instance  the  woman  adroitly  dropped  a  heavy  mill¬ 
stone  so  that  it  fractured  the  man’s  skull,  though  curi¬ 
ously  enough  without  depriving  him  of  consciousness. 


34  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Tlie  story  of  Jephthali’s  rash  vow  and  of  his  immo¬ 
lation  of  his  daughter,  so  often  likened  to  the  touch¬ 
ingly  beautiful  Greek  story  of  Iphigenia,  to  which  it  is 
in  some  respects  superior,  may  be  considered  a  plau¬ 
sible  folk-lore  tale  based  upon  facts  in  substantial 
accord  with  it  as  it  has  come  down  to  us.  Here 
though  the  vow  is  regarded  as  irrevocable,  the 
daughter  is  made  a  party  to  the  anguished  father’s 
awful  dilemma,  and  is  permitted  to  reply :  “  My 
father,  thou  hast  spoken  a  solemn  word  to  Yahweh  ; 
do  to  me  as  thou  hast  vowed,  forasmuch  as  Yahweh 
hath  wrought  for  thee  vengeance  on  thy  foes.”  The 
father  then,  at  her  request,  allows  her  to  retire  to  the 
mountains  to  bewail  her  sad  fate  with  her  mates. 
There  is  no  suggestion  here  of  maidenhood  as  re¬ 
strained  and  cloistered. 

In  the  story  of  Benjamin’s  rape  of  the  maidens  of 
Shiloh,  the  Canaanite  inhabitants  of  which  had  sworn 
not  to  intermarry  their  daughters  with  the  shattered 
clan  of  Benjamin,  it  is  the  same.  At  the  joyous 
feast  of  the  vintage  the  maidens,  who  had  apparently 
wrought  Avith  the  young  men  in  gathering  and  tread¬ 
ing  the  grapes,  come  out  of  the  city  to  join  in  the  re¬ 
ligious  dances.  It  is  said  of  Samson  that  he  saw 
and  talked  with  the  Timnath  girl  he  wished  to  marry, 
and  thus  became  enamoured  of  her.  The  same  free¬ 
dom  seems  to  have  been  accorded  young  women  in 
Israel.  Such  stories  as  we  find  in  the  earlier  por¬ 
tions  of  the  Hexateuch,  of  the  interview  of  Isaac’s 
servant  with  Bebekah,  of  Jacob  with  Bachel,  and  of 
Moses  with  the  daughters  of  Midian,  though  as  lit¬ 
erary  compositions  much  later  than  the  folk-stories 


THE  FAMILY 


35 


of  the  Judges,  may  be  taken  as  reflecting  a  tolerably 
accurate  conception  of  life  as  early  as  the  period  of 
the  Judges. 

Some  qualifications  need,  however,  to  be  made  to 
what  has  been  said  about  the  high  social  position  of 
woman  among  these  Israelitish  clans,  for  it  seems  evi¬ 
dent  that  women,  with  all  their  freedom  and  social  in¬ 
fluence  and  independence,  under  certain  circumstances 
were  yet  regarded  as  the  chattels  of  the  husband,  the 
father,  the  brother,  or  of  the  clan.  This  seems  true, 
not  alone  of  concubines,  as  appears  in  the  story  of 
the  outrage  of  Gibeah,  where  the  father  shows  a  will¬ 
ingness  to  sacrifice  his  virgin  daughter  rather  than 
violate  the  sanctities  of  hospitality,  but  of  women 
generally.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant  protects  the 
virgin  who  has  been  violated,  but  it  does  so  in  the 
thought  that  she  is  the  property  of  her  father.  A 
true  conception  of  woman’s  worth  and  dignity  was 
wanting.  There  was  not  that  chivalrous  treatment 
of  woman  that  we  might  expect.  Judges  xix.  24  may 
be  a  reflection  from  Genesis  xix.  8,  though  there  are 
some  reasons  for  supposing  the  Genesis  story  to  be 
the  later  of  the  two.  In  either  case  we  discover  a 
want  of  chivalry  in  the  regard  for  women  in  early 
Israel,  and  a  failure  to  recognise  her  inviolable  sanc¬ 
tity.  This  appears  even  more  clearly  in  stories  that 
at  least  reflect  very  early  conceptions,  though  prob¬ 
ably  somewhat  posterior  to  the  time  of  the  Judges. 
The  three  stories  in  Genesis,  in  two  of  which  Abra¬ 
ham  plays  a  leading  part,  and  in  one  of  which  Isaac 
figures,  may  have  had  a  common  original,  and  that 
may  have  been  late,  but  it  is  in  evidence.  An  honored 


36  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


progenitor  of  Israel  is  thought  of  as  willing  to  imperil 
his  wife’s  chastity  to  save  himself,  and  his  wife  is 
thought  of  as  submissively  acquiescing.1 

Woman  appears  to  have  borne  more  than  her  share 
of  the  burdens  of  life.  The  work  in  and  about  the 
home  devolved  upon  her,  even  to  the  pitching  of  the 
tent  when  they  lived  therein ;  she  also  shared  in  the 
work  of  the  field  with  the  men  at  certain  seasons. 
The  duties  within  the  home  must  have  been  numerous, 
as  most  of  the  material  worn  was  made  at  home  ; 
though  whether  the  richly  dyed  stuffs  and  the  em¬ 
broidery  referred  to  in  Judges  v.  30  were  of  home 
manufacture  may  be  questioned.  The  caravans  which 
frequently  passed  through  the  land  brought  the  manu¬ 
factured  products  of  Damascus  and  Tyre  to  the  door 
of  many  a  peasant,  while  the  women  shared  in  the 
spoils  of  war,  receiving  as  their  perquisites  all  articles 
of  female  apparel  taken. 

In  thus  dwelling  upon  woman  we  have  made  evi¬ 
dent  to  a  considerable  extent  the  place  of  her  husband 
in  the  family.  It  remains  to  notice  two  directions  in 
which  his  superiority  was  especially  marked.  The  re¬ 
sponsibility  for  the  care  and  the  training  of  the  chil¬ 
dren,  at  least  after  they  had  reached  a  certain  age, 
devolved  upon  him.  Then  he,  as  the  head  of  the 
family,  was  the  priest  offering  the  sacrifices  which 
necessarily  appertained  to  all  slaughter  of  domestic 

1  u  The  ancient  Hebrews  were  far  from  possessing  the  chivalrous 
feeling  which  we  find  among  the  old  Arabs.” — Moore,  Judges ,  I.  C., 
p.  418.  The  reading  of  W.  R.  Smith’s  Kinship  and  Marriage  led 
the  writer  to  question  this  statement.  Professor  Moore,  in  reply, 
very  reasonably  calls  attention  to  early  Arabic  poetry  as  his  suf¬ 
ficient  warrant  for  the  assertion. 


THE  FAMILY 


37 


animals  and  leading  in  all  devotional  or  ritualistic 
services.  Gideon  had  his  private  rock  or  altar  upon 
which  he  offered  sacrifices.  Manoah  killed  a  kid  and 
offered  it  as  a  burnt-offering  to  Yahweh.  So  also 
Jephtliali’s  vow  presupposes  on  his  part  priestly  func¬ 
tions.  Levites  are  known  to  have  wandered  from 
Judah  north  and  to  have  taken  upon  themselves 
priestly  functions  which  were  utilised  not  alone  at 
sacred  places,  or  sanctuaries,  but  also  privately  by  in¬ 
dividuals  as  their  wealth  increased  and  their  burdens 
multiplied ;  but  before  the  seventh  century  they  did 
not  crowd  aside  the  heads  of  families  as  priests. 

The  home  among  these  people  was  a  place  of  gra¬ 
cious  and,  usually,  of  abundant  hospitality.  Not 
only  was  it  open  to  him  who  was  discerned  to  be  a 
man  of  God,  as  in  the  story  of  Gideon  and  Manoah, 
but  also  to  a  poor  Levite  passing  through  the  land. 
Such  a  one  goes  by  Jerusalem  near  nightfall  because 
he  questions  the  hospitality  of  its  alien  people,  and 
presses  on  to  Gibeah  of  Benjamin.  The  inhospi¬ 
tality  of  the  men  of  Gibeah  the  narrator  puts  over 
against  the  generous,  even  sacred,  hospitality  of  the 
old  man  of  Ephraim  with  manifest  disapproval.  The 
Jiome  shared  with  the  village  or  with  the  clan  the 
social  features  of  the  religious  life.  Festivals  like 
those  of  the  vintage  and  sheep-shearing  seem  to  have 
been  affairs  of  the  village  or  of  the  clan ;  but  wed¬ 
dings,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  period  under  considera¬ 
tion,  if  not  earlier,  were  confined  to  the  home  and 
the  family.  The  bride-groom  with  his  wedding  com¬ 
panions  went  to  the  house  of  the  bride  and  took  her 
home,  where  at  his  own  expense  he  provided  a  feast 


38  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


that  often  lasted  several  days  and  was  an  occasion  of 
great  good-humour,  during  which  jokes  were  perpe¬ 
trated  and  riddles  propounded. 

There  could  have  been  no  such  extremes  of  wealth 
and  poverty  among  the  people  as  we  find  in  the  eighth 
century  in  North  Israel.  The  homes  may  have  been 
humble,  but  actual  want  was  felt  only  on  rare  occa¬ 
sions  when  the  Canaanites  of  the  neighbourhood  were 
jealous  and  troublesome.  Little  meat  was  eaten,  but 
cereals  and  fruits,  milk  and  curds,  wine  and  even 
stronger  drink  usually  abounded,  for  the  people  held 
labour  in  honour  and  were  industrious.  Even  a  man 
like  Gideon,  who  could  marshal  the  fighting  men  of 
his  own  sept  or  clan  and  surprise  and  punish  to  the 
point  of  utter  discomfiture  a  multitude  of  Bedou¬ 
ins,  was  not  above  threshing  wheat  for  his  family 
by  stealth  in  a  wine-press.  The  father  of  a  family 
was  reverenced  not  only  as  a  well  nigh  absolute  lord, 
as  is  seen  in  the  stories  of  Achsali  and  of  Jeplithah’s 
daughter,  but  he  was  also  loved.  The  family  was  bound 
together  by  the  strongest  ties  of  affection.  Polyga¬ 
my  and  concubinage  were  undoubtedly  common,  but 
they  probably  seldom  led  to  such  unpleasantness  as 
would  seem  to  be  indicated  by  the  stories  of  domes¬ 
tic  infelicity  found  in  Genesis,  wrhich  were  coloured 
to  suit  the  monogamous  ideas  of  a  much  later  day. 
This  has  its  bearing  upon  the  question  of  child-nurt¬ 
ure  in  those  early  times,  for,  as  another  has  pointed 
out,  polygamy  makes  each  mother  more  important  to 
her  own  children  than  the  father.1 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  i.,  p.  848. 


CHAPTER  Y 


THE  SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  SACRIFICE 

Primitive  man  seems  not  to  have  discriminated 
sharply  between  himself  and  nature.  Not  only  did  he 
think  of  animals  as  akin  to  himself,  but  he  also  sim¬ 
ilarly  conceived  of  inanimate  nature.  He  thought  of 
things  about,  above,  and  beyond  him  as  possessed  of 
spirits  not  unlike  his  own.  Inasmuch  as  mystery 
clung  to  many  of  these  manifestations  of  life  or  of 
energy  because  they  were  beyond  his  knowledge  and 
comprehension,  the  question  of  his  attitude  toward 
these  so-conceived  phenomena  was  to  him  all-impor¬ 
tant  because  to  him  they  were  real  spiritual  exist¬ 
ences.  Were  they  propitious  or  were  they  evilly  in¬ 
clined  ?  The  measure  of  his  success  in  life  wras  the 
measure  of  their  favour.  If  they  seemed  hostile,  he 
sought  to  placate  them ;  if  propitious,  he  might  easi¬ 
ly  find  wrays  of  rewarding  them.  Sacrifices  were  con¬ 
sequently  made  early,  though  not  by  fire.  Gifts  were 
exposed  in  woody  dells,  or  left  under  great  trees ; 
they  were  cast  into  wrells,  rivers,  lakes,  or  seas  ;  they 
■were  buried,  or,  as  in  the  case  of  drink-offerings, 
poured  out  upon  the  ground.  If  the  gifts  exposed 
were  carried  off  by  wild  beasts,  or,  if  in  other  ways 
they  disappeared,  they  were  thought  of  as  accepted ; 

if  the  gifts  cast  into  the  wraters  were  borne  away,  they 

39 


40  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

were  supposed  to  be  accepted.  If  the  offerings  were 
not  carried  off  or  borne  away,  the  giver  said  they  had 
been  rejected.  There  was  then  naught  for  him  to  do 
but  to  offer  more  precious  gifts.  The  drink-offering, 
if  it  soaked  into  the  thirsty  ground,  was  well-pleasing 
to  the  spirit  to  whom  it  had  been  poured  out. 

We  find  traces  of  the  origin  of  sacrifice  among  the 
more  primitive  customs  of  Israel  during  this  period, 
survivals  of  a  life  earlier  than  the  nomadic.  Indeed, 
long  after  this  period,  wine  and  blood  were  poured 
out.  When  animals  were  slaughtered  at  altars  or  at 
thresholds,  as  they  probably  were  at  this  time, 
though  efforts  to  find  traces  of  threshold  sacrifices 
among  the  early  Hebrews  seem  not  to  have  been 
successful,  the  blood  was  poured  out  as  an  offering  to 
God.  Though  possibly  not  the  earliest  form  of  sacri¬ 
fice,  it  must  have  been  a  very  early  form.  According 
to  Judges  ix.  5,  Abimelech  appears  to  have  slain  his 
seventy  brothers  at  a  sacred  stone  as  an  offering  to 
Yah  well  that  he  might  escape  blood-revenge.1  Here 
the  blood  was  poured  out.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant 
presupposes  the  offering  of  the  blood.  Inasmuch  as 
the  Hebrews  looked  upon  the  blood  of  a  victim  as  its 
life,  in  their  view  the  life  was  returned  to  its  source 
or  author  by  pouring  out  the  blood  upon  the  ground. 
This  custom  long  survived  among  the  Israelites.  We 
find  abundant  evidence  of  it  not  only  in  the  writ¬ 
ings  of  the  Deuteronomists  of  the  seventh  century, 
but  also  in  those  of  the  Priestly  School  of  the  fifth 
and  fourth  centuries.2 

1  Moore,  Judges ,  /.  (7.,  p.  242  f. 

2  Deut.  xii.  27  ;  Lev.  iv.  7,  etc. 


SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  SACRIFICE 


41 


A  beautiful  story  is  told  of  David  that  reveals  to 
us  why  it  was  that  this  man  who,  though  not  the 
sweet  and  inspiring  psalmist  that  we  have  thought 
him,  could  yet  inspire  confidence  and,  at  least  in  his 
younger  days  and  early  manhood,  win  and  hold  bold, 
fierce  spirits  in  loyalty  to  him.1  In  one  of  his  later  cam¬ 
paigns  against  the  Philistines  he  found  himself  after 
a  hard  day  in  one  of  his  old  haunts,  the  stronghold 
of  Adullam.2  The  wish  for  a  drink  of  water  from  the 
old  well  by  Bethlehem  finding  audible  expression, 
three  of  his  valiant  men  slipped  out  unobserved  and 
made  their  way  at  peril  of  their  lives  to  Bethlehem, 
got  the  water  for  which  their  leader  had  longed  and 
returned  therewith.  David,  with  the  instincts  of  a 
high-souled  man  not  insensible  of  the  cost,  poured 
the  water  out  as  a  drink-offering  unto  Yahweh.  The 
story  has  about  it  the  note  of  reality.  The  act  was 
characteristic  of  that  rude  time  which  was  not  utter¬ 
ly  wanting  in  men  who  could  hazard  themselves  in 
heroic  exploits,  as  it  was  not  without  leaders  who 
could  appreciate  them.3  But  though  the  story  be 
a  late  fabrication,  as  some  appear  to  regard  it,  yet  it 
reveals  quite  as  surely  a  form  of  sacrifice  that  must 
have  been  common  in  the  days  of  the  Judges. 

For  the  origin  of  sacrifice  among  the  Hebrews  wo 
should  not  look  to  the  Book  of  Genesis.  The  stories 
of  sacrifice  found  in  Genesis  contain  legendary 
material  worked  over  by  J  or  E,  or  by  earlier  writers, 

1  2  Sam.  xxiii.  15  if. 

2  A  stronghold  rather  than  a  cave. — H.  P.  Smith,  Samuel ,  /. 
(7.,  p.  203. 

3  There  is,  it  is  true,  the  possibility  that  David  looked  upon  the 
water  thus  secured  as  blood,  and  feared  to  drink  it. 


42  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


from  a  religious  motive,  thus  revealing  the  concep¬ 
tions  of  a  later  time.  Undoubtedly  the  Priestly 
Writer  was  wrong  in  refusing  to  speak  of  sacrifices 
as  happening  before  the  Exodus,  when  in  his  thought 
an  Aaronic  priesthood  was  instituted,  for  sacrifices 
in  accordance  with  primitive  ideas  must  have  been 
offered  by  the  Hebrews  from  earliest  times.1  For 
the  earliest  trace  of  sacrifice  among  the  Hebrews  we 
should  look  to  such  data  as  we  find  in  Judges  and  1 
Samuel,  as  we  shall  elsewhere  have  occasion  to  note. 
The  victim  was  slaughtered  at  some  natural  rock2  or 
on  some  stone  set  up  for  the  purpose,  not  at  a  regu¬ 
larly  constructed  altar.  Fire  had  come  into  use  in 
connection  with  sacrifice,  but,  as  a  rule,  only  the  in¬ 
wards,  the  fat,  and  the  head,  perhaps,  were  burnt.3 
In  offering  these  portions,  the  offerer  would  not  in  his 
own  eyes  be  placing  before  his  God  the  least  valuable 
parts,  for  the  contrary  was  the  case.  The  fatty  in¬ 
wards,  as  the  seat  of  the  life,  were  esteemed  peculiarly 
precious. 

But  it  is  upon  the  social  side  of  sacrifice  that  we 
would  here  especially  dwell.  Broadly  speaking,  we 
may  safely  sav  that  all  sacrifices  were  feasts  of  com- 
munion  and  all  meals  were  sacrificial.4  If  the  offerer 
was  alone  in  making  his  sacrifice,  he  yet  ate  with  his 

‘  Schultz,  American  Journal  of  Theology ,  vol.  iv. ,  p.  257  ff. 

s  Judges  vi.  20;  ix.  5;  xiii.  19. 

3  It  was  the  fragrance  or  odour  of  the  burning  fat  or  flesh  upon 
which  Yahweh  was  supposed  to  feed. — 1  Sam.  xxvi.  19;  Gen.  viii. 
21 ;  Amos  v.  21.  This  is  in  accordance  with  the  primitive  idea3  of 
all  peoples,  as  Tvlor  and  other  anthropologists  have  shown. 

4  W.  Robertson  Smith.  The  Rel.  of  the  Sent . ,  p.286  f . ;  H.  C. 
Trumbull,  The  Cov.  of  Salt. 


SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  SACRIFICE 


43 


God  in  a  common  meal ;  if  not  alone,  then  all  who 
participated  in  the  sacrifice  shared  also  in  the  com¬ 
mon  meal,  the  feasting  being  one  of  the  most  con¬ 
spicuous  features  of  the  sacrifice.  AYe  have  alluded 
before  to  the  father  of  the  family  as  the  priest  of  the 
household.  It  was  not  until  the  Book  of  Deuteron¬ 
omy  was  written  in  the  seventh  century  that  an  effort 
was  made,  which  could  have  been  but  partially  suc¬ 
cessful,  to  restrict  sacrifice  to  one  central  sanctuary 
and  to  confine  the  priestly  function  to  one  clan,  the 
Levites,  who  had  from  the  time  of  the  Judges  grown 
in  favour  as  priests.  Heads  of  families,  elders  of 
clans,  and  men  like  Saul  and  David  and  Solomon,  the 
rulers  of  Israel,  performed,  wuth  great  acceptance  to 
the  people,  priestly  functions. 

Probably,  in  early  Israel  the  head  of  a  single  house¬ 
hold  or  family  did  not  make  an  offering  of  an  ox  or 
sheep  as  often  as  leading  men  made  communal  offer¬ 
ings  in  clans  and  villages,1  towns  and  cities.  Such 
slaughter  wTould  be  an  occasion  of  some  importance  to 
a  people  that  did  not  make  large  use  of  flesh  as  food. 
Connected  wuth  these  feasts  would  be  certain  relig¬ 
ious  rites  with  sacrifices  of  portions.  The  men  of  a 
sept  or  clan  or  village  would  come  together  to  kill  a 
lamb  or  a  bullock.  As  a  sacred  custom  not  to  be 
ignored,  the  blood  of  the  victim  wrould  be  poured  out 
to  Yahweh,  or  to  the  local  Baal,  and  the  inwards 
burnt  as  the  portion  of  the  God  worshipped.  But,  if 

1  Such  offerings  were,  of  course,  communal.  The  altar  was  a 
place  of  slaughter.  W.  Robertson  Smith,  p.  322,  The  Rel.  of  the 
Sera.  It  was  also,  as  the  high  place,  a  place  of  feasting.  Budde, 
The  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex.,  p.  23. 


44  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  occasion  was  not  one  of  peculiar  danger  or  so¬ 
lemnity,  the  feast  would  be  the  chief  feature  of  the 
occasion.  This  seems  to  be  the  thought  of  W.  R. 
Smith.  “  Long  before  any  public  revenue  was  set  apart 
for  the  maintenance  of  sacrificial  ritual,  the  ordinary 
type  of  Hebrew  worship  was  essentially  social,  for  in 
antiquity  all  religion  was  the  affair  of  the  community 
rather  than  of  the  individual.  A  sacrifice  was  a  pub¬ 
lic  ceremony  of  a  township  or  of  a  clan,  and  private 
householders  were  accustomed  to  reserve  their  offer¬ 
ings  for  the  annual  feasts,  satisfying  their  religious 
feelings  in  the  interval  by  vows  to  be  discharged 
when  the  festal  season  came  round.  Then  the  crowds 
streamed  into  the  sanctuary  from  all  sides,  dressed  in 
their  gayest  attire,  marching  joyfully  to  the  sound  of 
music,  and  bearing  with  them  not  only  the  victims 
appointed  for  sacrifice  but  store  of  bread  and  wine  to 
set  forth  the  feast.  The  law  of  the  feast  was  open- 
handed  hospitality ;  no  sacrifice  was  complete  with¬ 
out  guests,  and  portions  were  freely  distributed  to 
rich  and  poor  within  the  circle  of  a  man’s  acquaint¬ 
ance.  Universal  hilarity  prevailed,  men  ate  and  drank 
and  were  merry  together,  rejoicing  before  their  God.”  1 

Late  as  the  story  may  be,  the  account  of  such  a 
feast  in  1  Samuel  ix.  must  reflect  the  characteristics 
of  the  early  Hebrew  sacrificial  feast.  Here  we  see  the 
elders  of  the  village  assembled  on  occasion  at  a  high 
place,  the  usual  place  for  such  an  assembly.2  They 
are  expecting  to  entertain  Samuel,  who  appears 

1  Rel.  of  the  Sem .,  p.  236  f. 

2  H.  P.  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  C. ,  p.  59  ff.  ;  Schultz,  Old  Test. 
Theo.,  toI.  i.,  p.  65,  in  speaking  of  E,  remarks  :  “  The  holy  places 


SOCIAL  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  SACRIFICE 


45 


at  such  times,  not  as  a  theocratic  ruler  or  as  a 
high-priest,  but  as  a  man  of  God,  or  head  of  the 
Shiloh  sanctuary.  He  is  to  be  their  guest  of  honour, 
to  give,  as  such,  peculiar  dignity,  if  not  peculiar  sanc¬ 
tity,  to  the  occasion.  He  is  not  necessary  to  such  a 
gathering,  but  the  occasion  means  more  if  he  is  with 
them.  In  this  feast,  as  in  all  feasts  in  which  animals 
were  eaten  as  food,  Yahweh  shared,  but  it  was  the 
feast  that  was  the  central  idea  or  feature  of  the  assem¬ 
bly  in  their  eyes.  The  modern  picnic,  though  seldom 
of  such  an  exclusive  character,  is  undoubtedly  a  sur¬ 
vival  of  such  primitive  gatherings,  just  as  the  New 
England  donation-party  is  a  survival  of  a  later  cus¬ 
tom,  that  of  sending  a  portion  of  a  victim  slain  to  the 
legally  constituted  priest.  On  this  occasion  there  was 
some  delay,  as  Samuel  lingered  for  Saul,  whom  he 
took  with  him  to  the  company  assembling  in  the  hall 
of  feasting,  or  common  dining-room  connected  with 
the  high  place.  Thirty  of  the  elders  or  free  citizens 
of  the  village  thus  came  together.  Samuel  and  Saul 
were  welcomed.  The  choicest  piece  of  meat  was  placed 
before  Saul  at  Samuel’s  suggestion.  It  is  not  difficult 
for  us  to  picture  to  our  minds  such  a  gathering,  in 
which  flesh  and  wine  were  partaken  of  generously, 
and  good  cheer  abounded.  These  occasions  were 
undoubtedly  frequent.1  By  bringing  together  the 

of  Israel,  against  the  worship  at  which  Amos  and  Hosea  are  already 
fighting  with  passionate  zeal,  are,  to  this  historian  objects  of  per¬ 
fectly  unembarrassed  joy  and  admiration.” 

1  1  Sam.  xx.  6,  29  ;  cf.  1  Sam.  i.  3  ;  ii.  19.  It  is  extremely 
probable  that  in  the  early  time  such  feasts  were  held  at  the  new 
moon  ;  cf.  2  Kings  iv.  23  ;  1  Chron.  xxiii.  31^  Amos  viii.  5; 
Hosea  ii.  11 ;  Isaiah  i.  13,  14. 


46  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


freemen  of  a  village  or  city  more  informally  than 
when  they  came  to  discuss  matters  of  public  policy 
in  a  legally  constituted  assembly,  they  made  pos¬ 
sible  talk  upon  matters  of  common  concern,  as  they 
also  furnished  occasion  for  the  interchange  of  thought 
and  feeling  in  other  directions.  It  is  no  wonder  that 
the  worship  of  the  high  places  should  have  survived 
until  long  after  Josiah’s  day,  and  that  the  people 
should  have  looked  with  disfavour  upon  the  Deuter- 
onomist  in  his  attempt  to  abolish  them.  As  the 
common  places  of  slaughter  and  of  feasting,  the  high 
places  might  easily  permit  of  various  forms  of  excess  ; 
in  the  early  time  they  must  have  partaken  largely  of 
the  character  of  the  gross  Baal  worship,  in  whose  hon¬ 
our  the  Israelites  came  together.  All  was  rough  and 
hearty,  not  unlike  the  old  manorial  feasts  of  feudal 
days  in  Britain  and  upon  the  Continent,  with  talk, 
strong  and  pure  at  times,  or  coarse  wit  and  repartee 
at  other  times,  enlivened  now  and  then  with  folk- 
story  and  song.  Yet,  perhaps,  just  because  these 
feasts  were  of  this  character,  they  must  have  played  a 
conspicuous  and  not  altogether  unwholesome  part 
in  the  development  of  the  social  life  of  the  people. 
They  belonged  to  an  early  stage  of  culture.  As  the 
people  became  more  civilised,  they  outgrew  them  ;  it 
was  probably  quite  as  much  because  they  had  grown 
away  from  them  as  because  of  their  character  that 
they  were  finally  abolished. 


CHAPTER  YI 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 

It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  tliat  in  a  state  of  society 
like  that  in  Israel  in  the  days  of  the  Judges,  which  to 
us  must  seem  crude  and  unorganised,  the  individual, 
though  possessed  of  strong  qualities  or  unusual  tal¬ 
ents  of  some  kind,  had  no  opportunities  for  their  exer¬ 
cise,  for  the  fact  is,  such  an  environment  creates  or 
produces  just  the  men  it  needs  for  peculiar  and  diffi¬ 
cult  tasks,  or  for  what  may  prove  to  them  delightful 
services.1  Opportunities  may,  it  is  true,  be  limited, 
the  theatre  for  the  exercise  of  unusual  gifts  may  be 
small,  but  the  capacity  for  something  outside  the  or¬ 
dinary  has  not  to  cease  for  want  of  exercise.  Con¬ 
sidering  the  time  covered  by  the  period  of  the  Judges, 
some  two  and  a  half  or  three  centuries,  which  carry 
us  to  the  close  of  the  life  of  Saul  (for  his  life,  as  does 
the  life  of  Samuel,  falls  within  this  period)  we  have 
but  few  stories  of  remarkable  men,  few  names,  indeed, 
of  such — fewer  than  we  have  been  wont  to  think,  if  the 
names  of  the  so-called  minor  Judges  are  simply  clan 
names,  as  has  been  lately  surmised.  Many  men  may 
have  come  into  some  sort  of  local  prominence,  distin- 

1  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  Ex .,  pp.  78,  79  ;  Moore,  Judges ,  P,  pp. 
44,  55  ;  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  815  ;  Driver,  Intro .  to 
L.  of  0.  T .,  p.  157  ff.,  1st  ed. ;  p  1G7  ff.,  8th  ed. 

47 


48 


THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


guishing  themselves  in  battle  or  in  other  ways,  for 
society  was  far  from  being  organised  solely  on  a  war 
basis,  but  few  such  are  mentioned  in  the  fragmentary 
literary  remains  of  the  period.  And  the  leading  men 
celebrated  in  folk-story  or  song,  as  Gideon  or  Jeph- 
thah,  for  example,  probably  played  a  much  smaller  part 
territorially  and  in  point  of  time  than  is  commonly 
supposed.  Only  in  the  thought  of  later  time,  in  the 
days  of  the  kings,  were  they  regarded  as  judges  or 
rulers  who  exercised  authority  for  long  periods  over 
all  Israel.  They  could  at  the  most  have  done  little 
more  than  incite  their  own  and  neighbouring  clans 
at  a  time  of  some  great  peril,  and  so  vindicate  those 
interested  and  involved.  In  doing  this  they  made 
a  name  for  themselves,  so  that  the  people  thought 
of  them  as  available  in  case  they  should  again  find 
themselves  in  extremity.  In  rare  instances,  as  ap¬ 
parently  was  the  case  with  Abimelech,  they  might 
be  inclined  to  usurp  authority  and  might  be  able  to 
lord  it  over  their  fellow-clansmen,  but  as  a  rule  they 
became  little  more  than  inspirational  centres  around 
which  thought  and  grateful  affection  crystallised ; 
their  influence  was  moral  rather  than  physical. 
Where  their  achievements  were  so  noteworthy  as 
to  pass  into  folk-story  or  song,  their  influence  must 
have  been  incalculably  felt  by  their  contempora¬ 
ries  and  by  later  generations.  In  some  instances 
they  may  have  become  the  permanent  leaders  or 
chiefs  of  their  clans  during  life,  but  as  a  rule  the 
civil  heads  were  men  who  had  less  remarkably  dis¬ 
tinguished  themselves.  We  know  almost  nothing 
of  the  civil  heads  of  clans.  Then,  as  now,  the  man 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


49 


who  did  the  unusual  thing  was  the  man  who  was 
honoured.  The  laborious  civil  servants,  very  likely, 
received  as  their  reward,  abundant  contemporary 
criticism,  and  at  their  demise  speedy  oblivion.  Of 
such  men  there  must  have  been  many  in  Israel. 
These  more  obscure  men  were  potent  influences  in 
shaping  and  in  giving  character  to  the  clans,  though 
they  ma}r  have  done  little  as  compared  with  the  mili¬ 
tary  leaders  and  heroes  in  the  w’ay  of  unifying  these 
clans.  Unfortunately,  we  know  next  to  nothing  of 
these  men,  and  it  is  unreasonable  to  suppose  that 
later  investigations  will  greatly  aid  us  here.  In 
speaking,  then,  of  the  influence  of  individuals  upon 
the  social  life  of  the  period,  we  must  necessarily  dwell 
chiefly  upon  those  leaders  of  whose  lives  we  have 
fragmentary  stories  which  contain  at  least  a  few  au¬ 
thentic,  indisputable  facts  and  a  considerable  body 
of  sociological  data.  That  there  were  many  more 
who  were  worthy  of  mention,  and  who  for  a  time  were 
celebrated  in  song,  is  undoubtedly  true.  Scholars  are 
not  amiss  in  discovering  reasons  for  the  retention  of 
most  of  the  hero-tales  that  have  been  preserved.  The 
more  perplexing  question  which  they  have  to  face, 
and  cannot  answer,  has  to  do  with  the  number  and 
achievements  of  those  whose  names  even  have  disap¬ 
peared. 

We  begin  with  Samson,  for  of  Joshua  little  of  a  re¬ 
liable  nature  is  known.  Very  likely  Joshua  was  the 
leader  who  saw  the  principal  clans  across  the  Jordan  ; 
he  may  also,  as  the  ablest  man  of  the  tribe  of  Joseph, 
have  had  much  to  do  with  securing  the  highlands  of 
Central  Canaan,  though  probably  not  as  much  there, 


50  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

and  certainly  not  as  much  elsewhere,  as  late  tradi¬ 
tion  accredits  him  with  having.  He  was,  let  us  be¬ 
lieve,  a  wiser,  humaner  man  than  we  have  been  wont 
to  think  him,  a  fearless  soldier,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
it  may  be,  a  sort  of  civil  magistrate.  Much  of  this  is 
mere  supposition,  for,  so  far  as  we  know,  Joshua  found 
small  place  in  the  literature  of  his  age  ;  but  it  prob¬ 
ably  has  the  advantage  of  according  with  facts  more 
closely  than  do  the  stories  of  the  barbarities  prac¬ 
tised  by  him  in  the  settlement  of  Canaan. 

The  story  of  Samson  as  it  has  come  down  to  us  is 
late,  belonging  to  a  time  not  long  prior  to  the  days  of 
Samuel.1  The  Philistines  are  in  the  ascendant  and 
are  already  harassing  Dan  and  Judah,  as  they  were 
later  to  trouble  all  Central  and  Southern  Canaan. 
But  the  original  of  this  folk-tale  must  be  very  old, 
belonging  undoubtedly  to  the  earliest  period,  and  it 
must,  if  we  are  to  get  at  its  social  significance,  be  so 
studied.  About  it  there  is  more  of  the  fabulous,  the 
marvellous,  than  about  the  other  stories.  The  parents 
are  visited  by  the  Messenger  of  Yahweh,  and  not  only 
given  an  intimation  of  the  conception  and  birth  of 
the  child,  but  also  instructions  as  to  how  the  mother 
shall  live  during  pregnancy  and  how  she  shall  rear 
her  son  when  born.  With  the  ascending  flame  of  the 
sacrifice  offered  by  Manoah,  the  messenger  goes  up 
into  heaven.  The  story  then  passes  on  to  the  young 

1  Kittel,  His.  of  Heb.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  91,  declares,  “  The  story  moves 
uncertainly  amid  myth  and  legend  and  history.  It  belongs  to  none 
of  them  wholly;  each  claims  a  share  in  it.”  Yet  Dr.  Kittel  thinks 
that  much  of  it  is  capable  of  a  satisfactory  historical  explanation. 
With  this  conclusion  we  must  agree.  Efforts  to  discover  mythical 
elements  in  the  story  have  not  been  remarkably  successful. 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


51 


manhood  of  Samson,  with  the  intimation  that  the  boy 
grew,  that  Yahweh  blessed  him,  and  that  the  spirit  of 
Yah  well  began  to  stir  him. 

Then  comes  the  narrative  of  his  nearly  consum¬ 
mated  marriage  with  a  woman  of  Timnath,  a  few 
miles  southwest  of  Zorah  in  Dan,  his  birthplace 
and  home,  in  which  narrative  his  first  labour  or 
exploit  (Samson  is  the  Hebrew  Heracles,  and  his 
exploits  are  not  unlike  the  labours  of  the  Greek 
Heracles)  is  related.  On  his  way  to  visit  the  Tim¬ 
nath  maiden,  he  comes  alone  upon  a  fierce  lion,  and 
feeling  the  demonic  fury  seize  him,  he  catches  and 
slays  the  beast,  rending  him  with  his  hands,  as  one 
might  rend  a  kid.1  Returning,  not  long  after,  he  finds 
the  carcass  of  the  lion  contains  hone}7-,  the  rapidity 
with  which  all  this  has  come  about  being  part  of  the 
marvel  of  the  story.  This  leads  to  a  riddle,  a  poor 
one  by  the  way,  on  the  part  of  Samson  during  the 
festivities  of  the  wedding.  The  solving  of  the  riddle, 
which  was  to  be  amply  rewarded,  was  made  possible 
through  the  worming  of  the  story  out  of  Samson,  on 
the  last  day  of  the  feast,  by  the  bride,  who  had  been 
threatened  in  a  way  characteristic  of  those  rough 
times  by  the  wedding  companions,  who  spoke  of 
burning  home  and  bride  and  family.  They  were  ap¬ 
parently  equal  to  such  conduct,  as  the  sequel  of  the 
story  reveals.  That  there  were  men  in  those  days, 
even  in  Hebrew  communities,  vile,  worthless,  lawless 
men,  who  were  capable  of  even  worse  crimes  than 
this,  we  know  from  the  story  of  the  outrage  of  Gibeah 
and  other  folk-tales  of  the  time.  Indignant  over  the 

1  See  Appendix  VI. 


52  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

treachery  practised  at  his  wedding,  Samson  went 
home,  leaving  his  discomfited  bride  to  be  given  in 
marriage  to  one  of  his  companions.  Later,  in  time 
of  harvest,  Samson  went  down  to  Timnath,  as  though 
his  marriage  had  been  consummated,  expecting  to 
visit  this  woman  as  his  wife,  taking  the  usual  morn¬ 
ing  gift,  a  kid.1  The  father  intercepted  him.  In¬ 
censed,  Samson  went  out  and  wrought  vengeance 
upon  the  Canaanites,  performing  what  to  us  must 
seem  the  most  incredible  of  all  his  labours,  the  de¬ 
struction  of  the  standing  grain  of  his  enemies  with 
foxes  tied  together,  tail  to  tail,  with  fire-brands  be¬ 
tween,  after  having  been  caught  for  this  purpose,  no 
small  feat.2  Vengeance  having  been  wrought  upon 
the  unoffending  woman  and  her  family,  Samson  is 
again  aroused.  A  multitude  of  Canaanites,  how  we 
are  not  told,  are  slain ;  and  then,  as  though  for  once 
fearful,  Samson  takes  refuge  in  the  Shephelah  of 
Judah.  Followed,  he  is  sought  by  the  men  of  Judah, 
who,  with  his  consent,  bind  him  and  deliver  him  into 
the  hands  of  his  old  foes.  Again  the  demonic  power 
comes  upon  the  man,  and  freeing  himself  easily, 
with  the  green  jaw-bone  of  an  ass  he  kills  a  thou¬ 
sand  men,  another  marvellous  labour,  and  does  there¬ 
after  what  seems  to  us  as  wonderful  coming  from  him 

]  Gen.  xxxviii.  20. 

2  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  64,  G.  E.  Post,  article,  Fox , 
admits  that  is  used  of  both  the  jackal  and  the  fox,  but  the 

writer  referring  to  this  incident  remarks  :  “  This  would  be  well  nigh 
impossible  in  the  case  of  foxes,  which  are  shy,  solitary  animals, 
but  not  difficult  in  that  of  jackals,  which  are  gregarious.”  This 
scholar  fails  to  perceive  that  the  marvellous  preponderates  in  this 
folk-story ;  in  it  impossibilities  vanish ;  nothing  is  incredible. 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


53 


— turns  his  exploit  into  poetry.  A  story  of  miracle 
follows.  This  man  of  many  devices  and  of  gigantic 
resources  being  athirst  and  in  extremity  in  a  dry 
laud,  has  a  rock  cleft  for  him,  out  of  which  water 
flows  to  revive  his  spirits.  Next  we  find  him  off 
across  the  plain  in  Gaza,  not  far  from  the  Egyptian 
frontier.  The  men  of  Gaza  either  watch  without  the 
city- wall  or  sleep  with  eye  open,  in  the  thought  that 
they  must  take  their  renowned  and  unsavoury  guest 
betimes  in  the  morning ;  but  Samson  rises  at  mid¬ 
night  and  goes  forth,  carrying  upon  his  shoulders  the 
mighty  gates  of  the  city,  bearing  them  off  and  up 
to  Hebron,  a  little  jaunt  in  the  night  of  over  thirty 
miles. 

The  next  move  on  the  part  of  Samson  is  in  the 
way  of  a  love-affair.  He  goes  down  into  the  vale  of 
Sorek  and  falls  in  love  with  and  pays  court  to  a 
harlot,  being  peculiarly  susceptible  to  female  charms. 
Through  her  the  Canaanites  seek  to  reach  her  lover 
and  to  shear  him  of  his  strength.  Various  experi¬ 
ments  are  made ;  but  it  is  not  until  he  is  importuned 
with  tears  that  Samson  yields.  Then,  with  head 
resting  in  his  mistress’  lap  he  is  shorn  of  his  great 
locks  and  therewith  of  his  gigantic  strength.  The 
old  demonic  fury  comes  not  upon  him  as  the  famil¬ 
iar  cry  is  heard  and  he  goes  forth  to  shake  him¬ 
self.  Helpless,  he  is  seized  and  blinded,  and  being 
cast  into  a  prison-house,  is  made,  as  his  contribu¬ 
tion  to  the  labour  of  the  prison,  to  turn  the  mill  in 
which  the  corn  is  daily  ground.  But  one  more  im¬ 
portant  episode  is  in  store  for  him,  one  more  labour 
is  to  be  performed  before  he  passes  off  the  stage. 


54  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


A  feast  in  honour  of  their  god,  a  local  deity,  is  made 
at  Gaza  whither  Samson  has  been  taken.  The  blind 
man  is  brought  in  to  be  mocked  and  to  furnish  sport 
for  the  multitude ;  but  upon  them  come  confusion 
and  death  as  the  mighty  hero,  in  the  one  great  and 
only  sublime  exploit  of  his  life,  bows  himself  and 
presses  out  the  great  pillars  upon  which  the  roof 
rests,  and  so  brings  the  building  down,  crushing  him¬ 
self  and  the  people  in  the  overthrow.  It  may  be  sur¬ 
mised  that  the  original  story  contained  the  records 
of  actual  deeds  wrought  by  one  or  more  of  Israel’s 
strong  men,  and  as  such  had  its  local  influence  in  the 
west  and  south ;  but  in  its  present  form  it  must 
have  amused,  fascinated,  and  stirred  many  a  member 
of  the  clan  of  Dan,  and  of  other  clans  as  well.  Mixed 
in  character  though  its  influence  must  have  been  mor¬ 
ally,  it  still  must,  on  the  whole,  have  incited  to  faith 
in  Yah weh,  the  wonder-worker,  and  must  have  led  to 
heroic  and,  let  us  hope,  to  more  disinterested  exploits. 
The  element  of  the  marvellous  may  have  rendered  it 
the  more  interesting ;  but  it  may  be  that  a  vein  of 
humour  running  through  the  story  was  recognised 
and  that  this  rendered  it  not  unwholesome  in  its  in¬ 
fluence  ;  that  it  may  in  truth  have  kept  it  from  incit¬ 
ing  to  what  in  practice  a  pure  ethics  must  condemn, 
for  the  Hebrews  were  not  without  this  sense  of  hu¬ 
mour  and  were  none  the  worse  for  having  it. 

Among  the  northern  clans  the  one  person  to  stand 
forth  conspicuously  in  the  early  time,  so  far  as  we  are 
able  to  judge,  was  Deborah,  though  Barak  appears 
not  far  behind  as  a  worthy  second.  The  overthrow 
of  Jabin  of  Hazor  by  the  clans  of  Issacliar  and  Napli- 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


tali  seems  to  have  antedated  the  overthrow  of  Sisera 
and  the  Canaanite  confederacy.  The  stories  should 
not  be  confounded  as  different  versions  of  the  same 
campaign,  but  the  second  story,  and  that  only  as  it 
comes  out  in  the  Song  of  Deborah,  can  be  implicitly 
depended  upon.  Here  a  woman  of  Issachar  with  a 
colleague,  Barak  of  Naphtali,  incites  her  own  and 
certain  other  clans  and  overthrows  the  Canaanites.1 
The  character  of  Deborah  as  it  is  suggested  must 
have  been  such  as  to  have  stirred  Israel  to  patriotic 
fervour  and  heroic  exploit.  There  was  nothing  in 
the  story  of  Jael  to  offend  their  sentiments  as  a 
people  to  whom  the  duty  of  hospitality  was  sacred. 
Sisera  appears  at  the  tent-door  asking  for  drink  as 
he  flees,  and  as  he  puts  his  head  into  the  bowl  to 
drink  the  milk  or  curds  she  hands  him,  she,  with 
no  little  peril  to  herself,  smites  him  with  the  tent- 
mallet  a  staggering  blow  upon  the  forehead,  thus 
felling  him  to  the  ground.2  In  the  curse  pronounced 
upon  the  faithless  inhabitants  of  Meroz  for  failing  to 
do  their  part,  and  in  the  sarcastic  taunts  thrown  at 
the  recreant  clans  of  Dan  and  Asher  and  Reuben, 
we  see  a  moral  influence,  coming  directly,  to  be  sure, 
from  the  personality  of  the  unknown  author  of  the 
ode,  yet  regarded  by  the  Hebrews  of  a  later  day  as 
emanating  from  Deborah,  who  really  inspired  it  as 
well  as  made  it  possible. 

Eliud,  the  saviour  from  the  Moabites,  and  it  may 

’Judges  v. ;  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  1047  f.  ; 
Hastings’  Dictionary,  vol.  ii.,  p.  807  f.  ;  Moore,  Judges,  I.  C.,  pp. 
107-173  ;  Budde,  Folk-Songs  of  Is.,  The  New  World,  March,  1893. 

2  Moore,  Judges,  P. ,  p.  66. 


56  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


be  from  the  Ammonites,  stands  forth  as  a  man  of  his 
time,  crafty,  grim,  and  bloody.  He  did  his  work  re¬ 
lentlessly,  and,  supplemented  as  he  was  by  Ephraim 
at  the  ford  of  the  Jordan,  freed  his  people  from  a  real 
peril,  for  there  was  danger  that  these  kindred  clans 
would  follow  after  and  crowd  out,  or  what  might  have 
been  as  unfortunate,  absorb  the  Hebrews.  We  can¬ 
not  forbear  the  thought  that  Ehud’s  deed  was  secretly 
regarded  with  detestation  and  that  his  influence  upon 
later  ages  was  unimportant. 

The  danger  from  which  Gideon  saved  Israel,  the 
frequent  if  not  the  permanent  devastation  of  their 
fields  in  the  north  and  east  by  the  Midianites  or 
Bedouins,  was  also  a  real  danger.  The  story  is  not 
free  from  the  marvellous  as  we  have  it.  This  son  of 
Joash  is  beating  out  wheat  stealthily  when  the  Mes-* 
senger  of  Yahweh  greets  him  as  a  man  of  valour,  in¬ 
citing  him  to  undertake  the  task  of  ridding  his  region 
of  these  hosts,  and  assuring  him  that  Yahweh  is  with 
him.  This  he  doubts,  as  he  does  his  own  ability,  and 
he  pleads  his  unimportance.  Urged  further,  he  asks 
that  he  may  be  permitted  to  refresh  his  guest,  whom 
he  takes  to  be  simply  a  man  of  God.  The  viands 
prepared  are  not  used  as  food  but  are  consumed  upon 
the  rock  or  altar  by  fire  as  the  staff  of  the  Messenger 
of  Yahweh  touches  them.  With  further  words  of 
assurance,  Gideon  is  left.  Later,  demonic  fury  comes 
upon  him,  and  he,  taking  three  hundred  of  his  clans¬ 
men,  makes  his  way  to  the  camp  of  the  Midianites. 
With  his  page  or  armour-bearer  he  visits  the  camp  of 
the  enemy  by  night  and  overhears  the  men  as  they 
talk,  and  so  discovers  their  timorous,  panicky  state. 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


57 


This  susceptibility  to  confusion  is  taken  advantage 
of.  Supplying  his  men  with  earthen  jars  and  torches, 
he  surprises  the  camp,  throws  all  into  confusion  and 
routs  them,  and  so  wins  the  day.  The  fugitives  are 
pursued  and  overtaken  with  slaughter,  and  their  two 
kings  being  made  captive,  are  afterward  slain.  The 
sequel  is  characteristic  of  the  times.  An  ephod-idol 
is  made  of  the  spoil  of  gold  and  is  set  up  by  Gideon 
as  an  object  of  divination  and  worship,  apparently 
with  no  thought  of  incurring  disfavour.  Gideon  as  a 
leader  among  his  own  clansmen  must  have  exercised 
after  this  considerable  influence ;  and  later  in  its 
simplest  form  his  story  must  have  had  a  happy  effect 
upon  the  members  of  other  clans  as  well  as  his  own. 
Not  so  Abimelech,  his  Shechemite  son.  This  man 
was  not  without  resources  of  a  kind  ;  certainly  Gaal 
ben  Obed  as  an  adventurer  was  no  match  for  him, 
though  he  carried  all  before  him  when  he  entered 
Shechem  with  his  kinsmen  freebooters.  But  he  was 
too  selfish  a  man  to  be  of  any  real  use  to  his  clan. 
Fortunately,  his  career  was  cut  short. 

Jeplithah,  though  impetuous,  thoughtless,  and  rash, 
stands  forth  more  clearly  and  more  inspiringly.  Even 
had  he  possessed  the  insight  to  see  that  he  might  in¬ 
nocently  retract  his  rash  vow,  and  by  substitution  of 
a  kid  or  ram,  as  in  the  Abraham  story,  which,  how¬ 
ever,  could  hardly  have  been  known  to  him,1  have 

’Not  known,  because  as  a  story  (Gen.  xxii.)  it  belonged  to  a 
later  day,  and  because  it  had  little,  if  any,  basis  in  fact,  save  that 
men  in  the  time  of  the  composition  of  E  were  beginning  to  look 
with  disfavour  upon  human  sacrifices.  Even  Saul,  after  Jonathan 
had  become  taboo,  escaped  from  his  dilemma  only  by  the  insistence 
of  the  people,  who  provided  a  substitute,  apparently  a  human  being. 


58  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


spared  his  daughter,  he  could  not  in  so  doing  have 
kept  his  influence.  To  the  men  of  his  day  a  vow  was 
well  nigh  as  irrevocable  as  death.  But  the  beauty  of 
this  folk-tale,  and  its  power,  grew  largely  out  of  the 
heroism,  the  filial  devotion,  and  piety  of  this  dis¬ 
interested  maiden  of  Gilead.  Like  the  name  of 
Deborah,  hers  shines  undimmed  to-day,  despite  the 
crude  and  superstitious  ideas  which  enveloped  and 
held  her.  Had  the  Hebrews  of  their  day  preserved 
for  us  from  this  period  naught  save  the  stories  of 
these  two  women  in  the  way  of  literary  material,  we 
should  still  be  immeasurably  their  debtors.  And  if 
our  hearts  thrill  as  we  read  of  these  women,  how  must 
it  have  been  with  devout  Hebrews  then  and  since  ? 
These  were  the  greater  lights  that  among  the  mothers 
and  daughters  of  the  various  Hebrew  clans,  even  the 
rudest,  were  uncertainly  and  somewhat  fearfully  try¬ 
ing  to  leave  behind  a  meagre,  wandering,  for  a  richer, 
settled  life.  There  were  many  of  lesser  brilliancy 
as  worthy  in  every  way  as  they,  who,  within  the  home 
and  without  it,  were  doing  their  part  to  subdue  and 
mould  the  more  ungovernable  spirits  and  passions  of 
their  husbands  and  brothers. 

To  one  who  has  not  studied  this  period  critical^ 
it  may  at  first  seem  strange  to  find  the  name  of  Saul 
enrolled  among  the  so-called  Judges,  as  are  Gideon 
and  Jephthah,  instead  of  classing  him  with  the  kings, 
and  studying  the  story  of  his  life  as  revealing  data  that 
have  to  do  with  the  social  life  of  the  people  under  the 
monarchy.  But  that  it  must  be  so  studied  is  now  evi¬ 
dent.  We  have  seen  that  the  Judges  were  not,  in  the 
proper  sense  of  the  term,  judges,  that  they  rather  were 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


59 


vindicators  of  their  clans,  or,  at  most,  of  a  few  clans 
besides  their  own,  in  some  great  emergency.  Saul 
was  little  more  than  this.  He  did  unquestionably 
serve  the  people  of  a  larger  area,  and  for  a  longer 
period,  largely  because  of  the  peril  to  which  they 
were  exposed  through  the  coming  of  the  warlike 
Philistines  into  prominence.  We  may  even  admit 
that  the  story  of  Saul  in  its  simplest  form  reveals  the 
beginnings  of  a  veritable  kingdom  or  monarchy ;  yet 
we  must  recognise  that  while  the  time  of  Saul  marked 
a  transition  to  another  form  of  civil  and  social  life, 
there  was  about  it  more  that  was  characteristic  of  the 
earlier  than  of  the  later  period. 

There  are  sections  of  1  Samuel  in  which  Saul  fig¬ 
ures  prominently  that  bear  unmistakable  marks  of 
having  been  very  largely  manufactured,  or  composed, 
by  late  writers  or  editors,  that  are  worth  little  to  the 
student  of  Samuel’s  life,  and  as  little  to  those  who 
wish  to  become  informed  as  to  the  life  of  Saul. 
Passages  which  represent  Samuel  as  a  judge  and 
theocratic  guide  or  ruler,  and  reveal  on  his  part  a 
jealousy  of  Saul’s  early  popularity  that  culminated 
in  certain  attempts  to  discredit  him  in  the  eyes  of  the 
people,  must  be  viewed  suspiciously.  Saul  was  as 
much  a  man  of  his  time  as  Gideon  was  of  his. 
Though  his  life  ended  in  darkness  and  gloom,  he 
wrought  mightily  as  a  bulwark  against  the  rising  tide 
of  Philistinism,  yet,  for  the  most  part  hopelessly,  for 
he  did  not  succeed  in  crushing  Israel’s  enemies.  If 
only  his  life  had  closed  earlier,  his  name  might  ap¬ 
pear  as  one  of  the  most  inspiring  in  the  early  annals 
of  the  Hebrews. 


60  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


This  is  the  simple  story.  The  asses  of  Kish,  a  man 
of  Benjamin,  having  wandered  away,  his  son  Saul,  a 
stalwart  man,  was  sent  with  a  servant  in  search  of 
them.  After  wandering  for  a  considerable  time  about 
among  the  hills  of  Ephraim  in  their  bootless  quest, 
Saul,  discouraged,  proposed  to  return,  when,  at  the 
suggestion  of  his  servant,  he  turned  aside  to  a  certain 
city  where  was  Samuel,  the  seer,  who  was  supposed 
by  divination  to  help  a  man  in  such  extremity.  Petty 
work  for  a  man  of  God  it  must  seem  to  us,  but  it  was 
not  so  considered  then.  As  Saul  had  not  the  where¬ 
withal  to  fee  the  seer,  the  servant,  in  his  eagerness, 
produced  his  bit  of  silver  that  would  serve  the  pur¬ 
pose.  Guided,  they  made  their  way  to  the  neighbour¬ 
ing  high  place,  where  were  gathered  the  elders,  or  free¬ 
holders,  of  the  village  for  a  sacrificial  feast,  at  which 
the  visiting  seer  was  to  be  their  honoured  guest.  Here 
Saul  was  welcomed  and  shown  distinction.  Having 
been  entertained  by  Samuel  over  night,  he  was  waked 
by  his  host  in  the  early  morning  that  he  might  speed 
him  on  his  way.  Without  the  city  gate,  unobserved, 
Samuel  anointed  as  his  choice  the  modest  and  won¬ 
dering  man,  thus  consecrating  him  to  Yahweh  as  the 
ruler  of  his  people,  the  leader  of  his  hosts  in  battle, 
as  one  eminently  fit  for  a  deliverer  from  the  Philistine 
yoke.1  Had  private  converse  with  him  revealed  the 
young  man’s  temper  and  his  strong  feeling  over  his 
people’s  peril  and  distress,  such  feeling  as  was  sure 
to  ally  him  later  with  the  ardent  patriots  known  as 
sons  of  the  prophets — a  guild  that  Samuel  apparently 
largely  influenced,  if  indeed  he  was  not  the  founder 

1  A  different  story  is  told  in  1  Sam.  x.  17-27. 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


61 


of  it?  It  is  more  than  probable.  We  are  told  that 
later  when  Saul  met  a  band  of  these  young  men 
coming  down  from  a  high  place  with  music  and  pa¬ 
triotic  ode,  he  who  had  been  anointed  and  incited  by 
Samuel,  joined  them  as  one  of  them  in  spirit  and  pur¬ 
pose.  Stirred  mightily  by  demonic  fury,  as  Gideon 
and  other  of  the  early  vindicators  of  Israel  had  been, 
Saul  was  immediately  recognised  by  the  people  as 
one  of  the  leaders  among  these  patriots.  Opportu¬ 
nity  came  soon  after  for  Saul  to  vindicate  Israel.  The 
Ammonites  invested  Jabesh-Gilead.  So  sore  pressed 
were  the  people,  that  by  stealth  they  sent  men  across 
the  Jordan  for  succour.  The  messengers  reached 
Gibeah  of  Benjamin,  the  city  of  Saul,  at  an  opportune 
time.  Stirred  by  their  story,  demonic  fury  came  upon 
the  man.  Cutting  in  pieces  in  their  furrow  the  steers 
with  which  he  had  been  ploughing,  Saul  sent  through¬ 
out  Benjamin  and  Ephraim  the  pieces  with  the  an¬ 
nouncement  :  “  Whosoever  cometh  not  forth  after 

Saul  and  Samuel,  so  shall  it  be  done  unto  his  steers.” 
Thus  aroused,  the  men  of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin  ral¬ 
lied,  and  Jabesh-Gilead  was  freed  from  the  Ammonite 
terror.  All  this  was  apparently  in  line  with  Samuel’s 
wish ;  there  was  no  sign  of  disfavour  as  there  was  not 
as  manifestly  any  reluctance  on  his  part  when,  later, 
the  people  themselves  came  to  Samuel  to  make  known 
their  wish  that  this  valiant  man  of  the  clan  of  Benjamin 
be  their  accredited  leader,  saying,  “  Who  is  he  that 
said,  Saul  shall  not  reign  over  us?  bring  the  men, 
that  we  may  put  them  to  death.”  Thus  was  Saul 
publicly  chosen  as  leader  or  vindicator.  That  Judah 
never  really  had  much  to  do  in  the  way  of  supporting 


62  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

Saul  seems  evident ;  that  many  of  the  northern  clans 
never  rallied  about  him  and  his  house  appears  evi¬ 
dent  also.  His  own  clansmen  and  a  few  nearby  men 
of  Ephraim  appear  to  have  made  choice  of  him  and  to 
have  stood  by  him  to  the  last,  because  he  seemed 
their  most  available  man.  He  who  had  humbled 
Ammon  was,  in  tlieir  thought,  the  man  to  humble  the 
haughty  Philistines. 

Some  two  years  later,  at  Micmash,  the  next  great 
opportunity  came  to  Saul.  He  blew  the  horn  and 
straightway  there  gathered  together  a  few  hundred 
men  from  the  neighbouring  country.  In  the  mean¬ 
time  his  son  Jonathan,  by  falling  upon  the  Philistine 
garrison  at  Geba,  had  given  the  signal  of  the  revolt 
from  the  hated  oppressors  on  the  part  of  Israel. 
But  so  small  was  the  company  of  men  under  Saul 
that  the  Philistines,  unapprehensive  of  serious  trouble, 
divided  themselves  into  companies  for  foraging  pur¬ 
poses.  This  gave  Israel  their  watched-for  advan¬ 
tage.  Jonathan  again  was  the  first  to  act.  With  an 
armour-bearer  he  climbed  a  hill  and  stampeded  a  com¬ 
pany  of  Philistines  encamped  in  the  neighbourhood. 
Saul  and  his  men  joined  in  the  pursuit,  and  the 
enemy  suffered  great  slaughter,  leaving  behind  at 
the  same  time  vast  spoil.  Saul,  for  reasons  of  his 
own,  laid  a  taboo  upon  all  food,  so  that  his  men  grew 
faint  ere  the  day  closed,  and  did  not  make  as  much 
of  a  success  of  the  rout  of  the  Philistines  as  other¬ 
wise  they  might  have  done.  Jonathan,  not  knowing 
of  the  taboo,  ate  some  wild  honey  which  he  happened 
upon,  thus  becoming,  according  to  the  ideas  of  those 
times,  himself  taboo.  But  for  the  intercession  of  the 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


63 


people  and  their  provision  of  a  substitute,  probably 
a  human  being,  he  would  have  been  put  to  death. 
When  at  last  the  people  did  eat  flesh  it  was  that 
which  was  unclean  of  its  blood,  because  it  was  raw 
or  because  it  had  been  killed  apart  from  any  altar,  and 
was  unconsecrated.  When  Saul  discovered  this  he 
had  an  altar  hastily  constructed,  and  ordered  that  all 
sheep  and  oxen  should  be  slaughtered  according  to 
custom  at  the  altar  thus  built.  There  can  be  little 
doubt  that  after  this  Saul  kept  the  enemies  of  Israel 
considerably  in  check. 

In  process  of  time  Saul’s  mind  revealed  signs  of 
insanity  or  melancholia  ;  and  David  ben  Jesse,  a  man 
of  war  and  affairs,  and  withal  a  skilful  harpist,  was 
brought  to  the  court  as  a  member  of  Saul’s  body¬ 
guard,  or  one  of  his  armour-bearers,  in  the  thought 
that  he  might  be  of  service  to  the  King.  Perhaps  it 
was  not  until  after  he  had  joined  the  company  that 
stood  near  Saul  that  his  skill  as  a  harpist  was  noted 
and  it  occurred  to  anyone  to  make  special  use  of  him 
in  restoring  Saul  from  time  to  time  to  his  right  mind. 
However  this  may  be,  we  know  he  was  thus  used 
with  most  happy  results ;  but  that  later,  after  David 
had  in  some  way  revealed  his  ability  as  a  valorous 
man  of  war,  and  the  women  at  the  entering  in  of  the 
gate  had  lauded  him  above  Saul  as  the  hero  of  the 
hour,  Saul  became  jealous  of  him,  looking  upon  him 
as  a  possible  rival.  So  did  his  jealousy  increase 
that  he  was  moved  to  put  David  farther  from  his 
presence.  Attempts  were  made  by  imperilling  him 
to  get  rid  of  him  altogether  ;  but  all  efforts  failed, 
and  the  man  grew  in  favour  in  the  eyes  of  the  people. 


64  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


An  attempt  having  been  made  upon  his  life,  David 
fled  from  the  neighbourhood,  and  for  years  lived  the 
life  of  an  outlaw,  showing  in  some  instances,  as  most 
outlaws  have  ever  been  wont  to  do,  respect  for  the 
rights  of  property  of  some  men,  but  living  for  the 
most  part  upon  the  forced  gratuities  levied  upon 
various  individuals  and  clans,  and  upon  the  booty 
secured  from  hostile  tribes.  We  need  not  trace  the 
rapidly  declining  sun  of  Saul’s  life  as  it  dark¬ 
ened  more  and  more  toward  its  close.  Enough  to 
note  that  Saul’s  earlier  life,  properly  studied,  pre¬ 
sents  no  such  blemishes  as  the  late  editors  of  the  old 
folk-lore  and  traditions  seemed  to  discover.  Until 
the  malady,  which  was  a  misfortune  rather  than  a 
personally  reprehensible  fault,  he  was  a  vindicator 
among  the  vindicators  of  Israel.  His  jealousy  of 
David  was  mean  and  petty,  and  undid  in  its  resultant 
consequences  the  good  that  he  wrought  in  the  earlier 
years  of  his  public  career,  and  left  such  an  impres¬ 
sion  upon  the  memory  of  men  as  rendered  it  easy 
for  late  redactors  of  the  history  of  the  time  to  use 
him  as  a  dark  background  upon  which  to  picture  the 
monarchy  that  was  to  endure  in  Judah  for  four  cen¬ 
turies. 

The  growing  prominence  of  certain  of  the  great 
sanctuaries,  and  of  those  who  officiated  at  them,  is 
seen  in  the  story  of  Eli,  who  lived  in  the  days  of  the 
earlier  Philistine  domination.  Probably,  as  the  Israel¬ 
ites  found  themselves  imperilled,  they  may  have  looked 
more  and  more  to  Yah  well  and  his  Ark,  the  symbol 
of  his  presence  and  his  might.  Certainly  the  loss  of 
it  meant  the  downfall  of  Eli  and  his  house.  Samuel, 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


65 


the  real  successor  and  inheritor  of  the  best  for  which 
Eli  had  stood,  became  a  more  prominent  factor  in  the 
life  of  the  people  through  his  encouragement  of  that 
new  and  strange  movement  that  furnished  an  outlet 
for  ardent  patriotism  known  as  the  prophetic  guild 
or  school  of  the  prophets.  The  story  of  his  life 
was  so  worked  over  'by  late  redactors,  who  made  of 
him  a  theocratic  ruler,  a  secon.d  Moses,  that  it  is 
difficult,  if  not  impossible,  for  us  to  make  the  keeper 
of  the  Shiloh  sanctuary  stand  forth  in  such  a  way  as 
to  determine  his  influence.  His  great  work  was  un¬ 
doubtedly  that  in  which  the  prophetic  guild  so  ad¬ 
mirably  supplemented  him,  the  revival  of  a  sense  of 
unity,  or  the  partial  creation  thereof,  among  these 
Hebrew  clans.  Just  here,  Saul,  as  his  choice,  proved 
for  long  a  great  helper,  as  David,  his  later  and  hap¬ 
pier  choice,  did  afterward  as  a  leader  and  ruler.  Still, 
so  long  as  Saul  remained  himself,  Samuel  seems  to 
have  stood  at  his  side  to  encourage  him  ;  it  was 
probably  not  until  Saul’s  mind  began  to  give  way  that 
Samuel  turned,  as  the  people  themselves  showed  a 
disposition  to  do,  to  David.  As  we  shall  have  occa¬ 
sion  in  another  place  to  speak  of  the  growing  national¬ 
ism  at  length,  more  need  not  be  said  at  this  point,  for 
we  are  now  interested  in  the  great  men  of  Israel  as 
forces  in  the  social,  rather  than  the  civic,  life.  Upon 
David  we  need  not  dwell,  for  his  real  influence  be¬ 
longs  to  the  period  of  the  monarchy. 

A  word  as  to  the  social  significance  of  all  this.  It 
is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  these  records  tell  of  no 
wrong  of  a  purely  personal  character  that  was  avenged, 
nor  of  any  purely  personal  exploit.  The  wrongs  wrere 


66  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


regarded  as  social  rather  than  individual ;  they  were 
looked  upon  as  offences  against  a  clan  or  against  the 
Hebrew  people.  So,  too,  the  exploits  narrated  were 
thought  of  as  performed  or  achieved  for  the  clan  of 
which  the  doer  was  a  member,  or  for  his  own  and 
neighbouring  clans.  The  story  of  the  outrage  at 
Gibeah  may  perplex  us,  for  we  may  not  be  able  to 
understand  it,  but  it  is  safe  to  say  that  if  it  happened 
as  told,  the  outrage  was  felt  to  be  an  offence  against 
the  inviolable  rights  of  hospitality,  if  not  against  the 
common  sentiments  of  humanity.  The  labours  of 
Samson  may  seem  to  us  like  deeds  of  a  purely  per¬ 
sonal  character,  in  which  a  man  of  great  strength  got 
a  little  needed  exercise,  and  at  the  same  time  re¬ 
venged  himself  upon  his  personal  enemies.  Probably, 
they  were  not  so  regarded  by  the  Hebrews.  These 
old  stories  have  for  us  a  new  meaning  when  we  grasp 
their  social  significance.  So  to  conceive  of  them  is 
to  lift  them  as  literature  up  into  the  higher  regions  in 
which  moral  ideals  are  seen  to  have  some  place,  though 
those  ideals  were  in  many  respects  vastly  inferior  to 
those  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  individual  who  came  into 
social  and  civic,  and,  it  may  be,  military  prominence 
among  these  early  Israelites,  had,  it  should  be  noticed, 
relatively  more  influence  toward  the  close  of  the  pe¬ 
riod  than  earlier ;  but  this  is  what  we  should  natu¬ 
rally  expect,  not  alone  because  of  the  peculiar  peril 
which  threatened  Israel,  but  also  because  society  had 
become  more  developed.  The  greater  the  extent  to 
which  social  integration  is  carried,  the  larger  the  op¬ 
portunity  for  the  individual  of  exceptional  talent.  In 
character  the  folk-lore  tales  of  1  Samuel  are  scarcely, 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  INDIVIDUALS 


67 


if  at  all,  superior  to  those,  of  the  Judges.  It  is  only 
when  they  are  closely  scrutinised  that  the  fact  that 
they  reveal  a  somewhat  advanced  social  state  appears. 
So,  too,  as  regards  the  place  of  certain  prominent 
men.  Without  careful  critical  study  the  place  of  in¬ 
dividuals  cannot  be  determined  nor  their  influence 
upon  the  social  life  of  the  people  be  estimated  with 
any  degree  of  exactitude. 


CHAPTER  YII 


INDUSTRY,  TRADE,  AND  TRAVEL 

Among  the  members  of  a  clan  there  was,  we  may 
safely  assume,  considerable  social  intercourse.  The 
limited  extent  of  territory  occupied  by  a  clan  would 
render  this  easily  possible,  even  though  highways 
were  few  and  poor,  and  the  importance  of  the  clan  as 
an  organisation  would  necessitate  this.  Each  family 
may  have  been  largely  dependent  upon  its  own  re¬ 
sources  ;  each  city  most  certainly  was  so  dependent. 
Still,  on  questions  of  public  policy,  in  the  settlement 
of  individual  controversies  that  were  beyond  the 
jurisdiction  or  power  of  the  elders  who  sat  in  the 
gates,  in  the  arrangement  of  marriages,  etc.,  there 
must  have  been  occasion  for  frequent  communication 
between  the  different  parts  of  a  clan.  While  wagons 
were  used  but  little,  save  for  local  purposes,  being 
too  cumbrous,  saddled  asses  were  common,  and  they 
furnished  a  convenient  and  fairly  comfortable  means 
of  locomotion  between  neighbouring  and  even  dis¬ 
tant  cities.  “  A  comparison  of  the  passages  in 
which  Tran  (he-ass)  and  pntf  (she-ass)  respectively 
occur,”  as  an  Old  Testament  student  has  remarked, 
“  shows  that  the  former  was  more  used  for  carrying 
burdens  and  for  agriculture,  the  latter  for  riding. 
Hence  some  have  thought  that  ‘pt'itf  denotes  a  supe- 

68 


INDUSTRY,  TRADE,  AND  TRAVEL 


69 


rior  breed  and  not  simply  she-ass  ;  but  this  opinion 
is  now  given  up.  We  must  conclude  that  she-asses 
were  preferred  for  riding.  As  the  name  shows,  the 
Eastern  ass  is  generally  reddish  in  colour;  white 
asses  are  rarer,  and,  therefore,  used  by  the  rich  and 
distinguished.” 1 

The  home-life  of  the  people  was  far  from  being  a 
life  of  isolation  and  absolute  privacy,  for  the  home 
was  usually  in  village  or  city,  in  a  centre  that  pulsated 
placidly,  after  the  Eastern  fashion,  rather  than  vio¬ 
lently,  with  life  and  activity.  Where  agriculture  is  car¬ 
ried  on  according  to  primitive  methods,  a  moderately 
fertile  district  permits  of  a  considerable  population. 
It  is  only  when,  as  in  our  own  day,  farming  is  done 
by  machinery  that  agriculturalists  lead  a  lonely  life  ; 
where  work  is  done  by  hand,  many  hands  are  needed. 
Men  must  perforce  be  brought  together  and  must  toil 
side  by  side,  and  at  certain  seasons  women  must  bear 
their  part,  if  custom  will  allow  it,  so  giving  to  the  so¬ 
cial  side  of  labour  an  element  of  colour.  The  Hebrew 
clans  may  have  been  slow  in  adjusting  themselves  to 
the  new  environment,  and  may  have  depended  for  a 
long  time  largely  upon  their  flocks  and  herds,  but, 
even  so,  they  were  not  isolated  because  their  life  was 
of  necessity,  under  the  circumstances,  a  village  life. 
The  young  man  might  lead  forth  the  flock  to  pasture 
in  the  morning  for  a  day  of  quiet  vigils,  but  he  came 
back  at  night  with  his  charge  to  fold  it  within  or 
near  the  village.  Life  was  probably  not  as  insecure 
during  ordinary  times  as  we  have  thought.  Hough 
men  might  betake  themselves  to  a  life  of  outlawry,  as 

1  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  344. 


70  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

did  Gaal  ben  Obed  and  Jephtliah  and  David,  but 
they  may  have  depended  largely  upon  the  plunder  of 
caravans,  and  even  here  may,  as  a  rule,  have  levied 
toll  or  tribute,  or  something  that  seemed  akin  to  it, 
instead  of  making  entire  spoil  thereof,  as  was  the  case 
in  actual  warfare.  The  unfortunate  state  of  things 
in  the  north  in  the  days  of  Deborah,  when  caravans 
ceased  and  the  few  who  travelled  betook  themselves 
to  by-paths,  is  spoken  of  as  though  it  were  excep¬ 
tional,  as  it  probably  was.  Ordinarily  nothing  is 
said  of  the  difficulty  of  communication,  and  the  pass¬ 
ing  of  men  and  women  from  place  to  place  is  not  re¬ 
ferred  to  as  extraordinary.  If  the  so-called  Blessing 
of  Jacob,  late  as  it  is,  may  be  used  as  illustrative 
of  those  times,  there  are  certain  passages  not  to  be 
overlooked,  for  they  bear  upon  the  social  life  of  their 
day  with  great  force.  Take  the  allusion  to  Benjamin, 
a  clan  in  a  narrow  and  infertile  region  northeast  of 
Jerusalem : 

Benjamin  is  a  wolf  that  raveneth  : 

In  the  morning  he  shall  devour  the  prey, 

And  in  the  evening  he  shall  divide  the  spoil.1 

So,  too,  take  the  passage  referring  to  Dan,  a  clan 
that  had  at  the  time  gone  up  into  the  East  Lebanon 
region  under  the  shadows  of  Hermon,  and  was  there¬ 
fore  favourably  situated  for  the  spoiling  of  caravans : 

Dan  shall  be  a  serpent  in  the  way, 

An  adder  in  the  path, 

That  biteth  at  the  horse’s  heels 
So  that  the  rider  f alleth  backward. a 


1  Gen.  xlix.  27. 


5  Gen.  xlix.  17. 


INDUSTRY,  TRADE,  AND  TRAVEL 


71 


Akin  to  these  are  the  words  concerning  Judah  that 
had  territory  more  advantageously  located  as  a  ren¬ 
dezvous  for  freebooters  than  for  agriculture. 

The  location  of  Canaan  was  favourable  for  trade. 
Highways  were  few,  but  in  a  land  where  the  soil  is 
such  as  for  the  most  part  is  found  there,  paths  could 
easily  be  worn  and  could  be  kept  by  constant  travel 
in  a  fairly  passable  state.  Travellers,  it  is  true,  could 
find  no  inns  along  the  way  ;  they  must  carry  food  for 
themselves  and  for  their  asses ;  still,  inasmuch  as  the 
home  was  a  place  of  gracious  and  generous  hospital¬ 
ity,  such  travellers  could  seldom  have  suffered  neglect. 
Though  a  night  in  the  open  country  under  the  won¬ 
drous  Eastern  sky  was  not  to  be  dreaded,  it  is  unlikely 
that  passengers  had  often  to  tarry  without  village  or 
city  gate.  The  pictures  of  the  hospitable  entertain¬ 
ment  of  guests  which  we  find  in  the  literature  of  the 
period  under  consideration  are  such  as  stir  us  to-day 
when  a  gently  nurtured  Christian  woman  may,  while 
utilising  modern  conveniences,  pass  from  place  to 
place,  from  city  to  city,  and  encounter  naught  but  a 
bald  officialism  which  may  refuse  even  the  barest 
courtesies  of  life  unless  tips  are  freely  dispensed.  The 
charm  of  it  does  not  belong  wholly,  by  any  means, 
we  should  remind  ourselves,  to  the  literary  material 
in  which  it  is  depicted,  but  to  the  real  life  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  which  is  set  forth  with  fidelity  to  local  colour 
and  conditions. 

That  the  Hebrews  learned  many  of  the  arts  of  life 
of  the  Canaanites  after  they  settled  among  them,  we 
have  already  remarked.1  The  original  sources  of  the 

1  Piepenbring,  His.  du  Peuple  d'ls pp.  96-100. 


72  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


period  mention  manufactures  of  various  kinds  which 
have  to  do,  not  alone  with  a  nomadic  and  an  agricult¬ 
ural  stage,  but  also  with  a  social  state  considerably 
advanced.  Mention  is  made  of  bowstrings  and  war- 
horns,  of  shields  and  spears,  of  shepherd’s  pipes  and 
ox-goads,  of  doors  and  locks,  of  chairs  and  tables,  of 
razors  or  shears,  of  cords  and  ropes,  of  dyed  stuffs 
and  embroidery,  of  the  vine  and  barley,  of  wine  and 
strong  drink.  But  one  conclusion  is  possible ;  it  is 
that  the  Israelites  were  quick  to  learn  of  their  neigh¬ 
bours,  and  that  they  were  for  the  most  part  on  such 
friendly  terms  with  them  that  the  civilisation  of  the 
one  people  easily  became,  with  slight  modifications, 
the  civilisation  of  the  other  people.  This  is  the 
thought  of  another.  “  Living  close  together,  and  often 
enough  associating  in  a  peaceable  way  with  the  for¬ 
mer  possessors  of  the  land,  could  not  fail  to  exert  its 
influence  also  on  Israel’s  moral  and  intellectual  life. 
Israel  entered  on  the  inheritance  of  a  much  richer 
and  more  advanced  civilisation  than  that  which  it 
had  itself  as  yet  commanded.  The  industrial  art  and 
discoveries  of  Phoenicia,  still  more  perhaps  the  art 
and  civilisation  of  the  Euphrates  and  Eg}^pt  that 
Phoenicia  had  borrowed,  were,  through  the  active 
trade  relations  subsisting,  soon  the  property  of  Israel. 
Its  horizon  was  widened ;  knowledge  and  interests, 
but  with  them  also  needs  and  enjoyments,  that  had  up 
to  this  time  remained  unknown  to  this  rough  desert 
people,  were  made  accessible  to  them.”1 

Eastern  cities  had  their  squares,  or  open  spaces 
within  their  gates,  in  which  friends  might  meet  each 

1  Kittel,  His.  of  the  Heb vol.  ii.,  p.  94  f. 


INDUSTRY,  TRADE,  AND  TRAVEL 


73 


other,  where  strangers  might  tarry  until  someone  felt 
moved  to  offer  them  hospitality,  and  where  trade  might 
be  prosecuted,  the  open  space  serving  frequently  as 
a  market-place.  Here,  too,  or  outside  the  gate,  the 
people  came  together  whenever  matters  of  common 
concern  impelled  them,  and  it  apparently  took  little 
to  bring  out  the  whole  population  of  a  village  or  of 
a  city.  A  fresh  bit  of  intelligence  from  beyond  their 
walls,  a  vague  rumour  of  impending  disaster,  the  com¬ 
ing  of  some  well-known  personage,  this,  and  even  less, 
might  empty  all  homes  of  both  old  and  young.  Be¬ 
tween  cities  of  the  same  clan  there  may  have  been 
little  occasion  for  trade,  but  the  passing  of  caravans 
from  place  to  place  linked  such  cities  together  and  so 
helped  to  keep  them  in  touch  with  each  other.  On 
the  whole,  then,  we  may  speak  of  the  time  as  one  in 
which  life  was  not  socially  isolated.  If  there  was 
such  communication  and  intercourse  as  made  possible 
the  propagation  and  dissemination  of  evil,  there  was 
through  this  same  social  interchange  opportunity  for 
good  influences  to  pass  from  village  to  village,  and 
from  city  to  city.  The  mind  could  not  have  stagnated. 
Life  was  alert  and  active.  If  competition  was  not 
keen,  intercourse  was  unrestricted  and  frequent.  The 
social  instincts  of  the  people  may  not  have  been  of  the 
purest,  but  they  found  satisfaction ;  and  it  was  prob¬ 
ably  better  so.  The  humblest  peasant  knew  what  it 
devolved  upon  him  as  a  Hebrew  to  do,  and  was  quick 
and  willing  to  show  himself  a  loyal  member  of  his 
clan  if  not  of  his  people  ;  of  the  latter  relation  we  can¬ 
not  speak  confidently.  Surely,  in  view  of  the  peril  in 
which  some  clans  as  Issachar,  Naphtali,  and  Zebulun 


74  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


were  in  the  days  of  Sisera,  the  failure  of  Reuben,  Dan, 
and  Asher  to  rally  to  their  support  seems  despicable. 
And  it  was  with  the  three  hundred  valiant  men  of  his 
own  sept  or  clan,  it  appears,  that  Gideon  had  to  take 
summary  vengeance  upon  Midian.  In  this  instance 
other  septs  and  clans  may  not  have  been  given  an 
opportunity ;  still  it  may  be  questioned  whether, 
had  they  had  such  opportunity,  they  would  have  re¬ 
sponded  with  the  alacrity  which  later  historians  rep¬ 
resent  them  as  manifesting.1  But  though  the  peas¬ 
ant’s  or  the  villager’s  loyalty  was  solely  loyalty  to 
his  clan,  he  was  in  temperament  socially  inclined. 
He  could  not  live  apart  from  men.  He  did  not  take 
easily  to  an  ascetic  life ;  he  loved  the  haunts  of  men 
and  availed  himself  to  the  extent  of  his  means,  and 
even  beyond,  of  those  opportunities  which  were  pos¬ 
sible  for  coming  into  pleasant,  social  touch  with  life. 

1  On  morality  as  an  affair  of  the  clan,  see  Budde,  The  Rel.  of  Is. 
to  the  Ex.,  p.  33. 


CHAPTER  VIII 


CHARACTERISTIC  STORIES 

“  The  great  value  of  tlie  Book  of  Judges,”  remarks 
Professor  G.  F.  Moore  in  kis  Polychrome  Judges,  “lies 
in  the  faithful  and  vivid  pictures  which  it  gives  us 
of  this  troubled  and  turbulent  time  in  which  historical 
Israel  was  making.”  He  adds,  “  Hardly  any  narrative 
in  the  Old  Testament  throws  more  light  on  the  social 
and  religious  life  of  the  ancient  Israelites  than  the 
story  of  Micah’s  idol  and  the  migration  of  the  Danites 
(cc.  xvii.,xviii.).”  1  Piepenbring,  in  his  history  of  the 
people  of  Israel,  has  a  chapter  on  “  The  Moral  Life,” 2 
in  which  he,  with  scarcely  a  remark,  retells  this  story 
and  the  story  that  follows,  “  The  Outrage  of  Gibeah.” 
The  character  of  these  stories  and  their  great  fulness 
of  detail  seems  enough  to  warrant  at  this  point  a 
special  study  of  them,  that  their  sociological  data  may 
be  looked  at  directly.  Such  study  need  not  prevent 
our  making  other  use  of  them  as  our  consideration  of 
various  subjects  may  naturally  suggest.  There  is  the 
more  occasion  for  such  study  from  the  fact  that  in  the 
case  of  the  first  story  late  redactors  have  worked  over 
the  material  and  have  in  so  doing  made  numerous 
additions  ;  and  also  because  in  the  case  of  the  second 
story,  similar,  though  more  considerable,  changes  have 

1  Moore,  Judges ,  P p.  45.  2  His.  du  Peu.  d'  Is.,  p.  119  ff. 

75 


76  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


been  made.  Only  the  simpler  and  original  form  of 
these  stories  specially  interests  us.  Upon  the  origi¬ 
nal  form  of  these  two  and  one  other  story  we  shall 
dwell  briefly.  Whatever  their  chronological  order, 
now,  of  course,  impossible  to  determine,  we  will  take 
them  in  their  biblical  order,  beginning  with  the 
story  of  Micah’s  idol  and  the  migration  of  the  clan 
of  Dan. 

It  seems  that  a  man  in  the  highlands  of  Ephraim 
had  a  private  sanctuary,  in  which  he  placed  an  ephod- 
idol  and  other  images.  Here,  as  in  the  case  of  Gideon 
(Judges  viii.  27),  the  ephod-idol  appears  to  have  been 
employed  in  consulting  the  oracle  of  Yahweh,  i.e., 
in  determining  by  lot  which  of  two  courses  the  in¬ 
quirer  was  to  pursue.  It  may  have  been  a  rude  im¬ 
age  of  Yahweh.  At  first  one  of  his  sons  served  as 
priest,  but  later  a  Levite  who  had  wrandered  north 
from  Judah  was  easily  persuaded  to  serve  in  that  ca¬ 
pacity  as  keeper  of  the  sanctuary.  This  would  not 
prevent  Micah  from  officiating  at  ordinary  sacrificial 
feasts.  It  is  hardly  supposable  that  he  would  have 
delegated  such  priestly  and  paternal  functions  to 
another.  Ample  arrangements  were  made  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  Levite  by  Micah,  who  seems  to 
have  rejoiced  in  his  good  fortune.  There  appears  to 
have  been  the  feeling  on  his  part  that  the  lot  could  be 
handled  by  his  new  priestly  attendant  in  such  a  way 
as  to  secure  the  favour  of  Yahweh. 

Some  time  after  this,  five  Danites,  representatives 
of  the  different  septs  of  the  clan,  came  through 
the  hills  of  Ephraim  on  their  way  north  seeking  a 
suitable  home  for  their  sorely  straitened  people. 


CHARACTERISTIC  STORIES 


77 


While  being  entertained  by  Micah  over  night,  they  in¬ 
terviewed  the  Levite  and  got  him  to  cast  the  lot,  and 
thus  determine  whether  success  was  to  crown  their 
search.  Receiving  an  affirmative  answer,  they  went 
on  and  explored  Laish,  at  the  sources  of  the  Jordan, 
finding  a  quiet  folk  living  unsuspicious  of  danger  in 
peace  and  security.  Returning,  they  incited  their 
people  to  migrate.  Six  hundred  warriors,  armed  free¬ 
men  apparently,  with  their  wives  and  children,  pre¬ 
sumably  the  major  part  of  the  clan,  set  out,  falling 
upon  and  carrying  off  Micah’s  sanctuary,  Levite  and 
all,  the  man  not  being  loath  to  become  the  priest  of  a 
clan  which  would  be  able  to  maintain  him  more 
generously  than  a  single  well-to-do  freeman.  The 
protests  of  Micah  avail  not.  The  Danites  keep  on 
their  way,  and,  reaching  Laish,  overthrow  it  and  dis¬ 
possess  the  people  whom  they  both  spoil  and  slaugh¬ 
ter.  In  this  case  we  follow  as  reliable  and  as  sub¬ 
stantially  true  to  the  age  the  story  as  given  in  Judges, 
omitting  only  the  various  editorial  notes  of  later  re¬ 
dactors.  The  naivete  of  this  story  is  remarkable. 
There  is  no  thought  that  this  Ephraimite  worship  is 
such  as  can  in  any  way  be  displeasing  to  Yahweh. 
The  people  are  true  to  their  highest  conceptions  of 
religion.  On  the  whole,  there  is  apparently  on  their 
part  something  of  the  same  satisfaction  which  Micah 
felt  when  he,  having  got  an  epliod-idol  for  his  new 
sanctuary,  was  so  fortunate  as  to  have  a  Levite  come 
his  way.  That  they  were  wronging  the  man  did  not 
seem  to  disturb  them,  for  he  was  outside  their  clan,  a 
man  of  Ephraim.  Morality  was  not  among  the  Is¬ 
raelites  wholly  a  thing  of  the  clan,  though  it  must 


78  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


have  been  largely  so.1  They  surely  would  not  have 
violated  a  tribal  sanctuary  of  Ephraim,  because  they 
were  numerically  inferior  to  that  clan.  Perhaps  they 
would  not  have  done  so  had  they  been  superior  in 
point  of  numbers.  Some  reverence  for  holy  places 
of  note,  and  possibly  some  sense  of  kinship,  especially 
as  they  were  a  Rachel  clan,  might  have  restrained 
them.  Their  utter  unconcern  for  the  fate  of  Laisli 
and  her  people  is  characteristic  of  the  time.  It  leads 
us  to  surmise  that  the  Hebrew  clans  when  they  set¬ 
tled  in  Canaan  might  have  slaughtered  with  well- 
nigh  as  bloody  a  hand  as  the  priestly  passages  in 
Joshua  assert  that  they  did,  without  seriously  embar¬ 
rassing  compunctions.  What  Yahweh,  their  God,  put 
within  their  reach  was  theirs  to  secure  and  hold,  re¬ 
gardless  of  the  suffering  it  might  entail  upon  others. 
If  it  is  said  that  they  may  have  spared  most  of  the 
women  and  children  in  this  instance,  that,  after  all, 
the  people  may  not  have  been  wholly  devoted  to  the 
sword,  we  can  only  say  in  reply  that  at  the  best  it  was 
from  our  point  of  view,  which,  of  course,  could  not  be 
theirs,  an  outrage  and  slaughter  of  a  grim  and  bloody 
type. 

The  story  of  the  outrage  of  Gibeah  comes  to  us 
out  of  the  very  heart  of  those  rough  times,  yet  with 
gleams  of  the  dawning  of  a  better  day  that  was  to 
rise  upon  Israel ;  for  that  such  an  outrage  was  not 

1  Budde,  The  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex p.  33. 

Piepenbring  very  truly  says,  in  commenting  on  this  incident :  “  Ils 
associent  sans  le  moindre  scrupule  le  vol  et  la  pi6t6.  Ils  ne  trou- 
vent  aucune  incompatibility  entre  les  deux.” — Histoire  du  Peuple 
d’ Israel,  p.  122. 


CHARACTERISTIC  STORIES 


79 


allowed  to  go  unpunished,  argues  well  for  the  grow¬ 
ing  social  consciousness  of  the  people.1  A  Levite, 
living  in  Ephraim,  took  as  a  concubine,  probably 
before  going  north,  for  he  very  likely  originated  in 
the  territory  of  Judah,  a  woman  from  Bethlehem- 
Judah,  who  so  pined  for  her  home  that  she  ran  away. 
Following,  the  Levite  found  her,  as  he  expected  to,  at 
her  old  home.  A  state  of  society  that  rendered  it 
possible  for  such  a  woman  to  make  her  way  from  the 
highlands  of  Ephraim  to  the  hill  country  of  Judah, 
could  not  have  been  wholly  disorganised.  There 
must  have  been  more  than  a  semblance  of  law  and 
order,  to  say  the  least.  The  father-in-law  of  the 
Levite,  relieved  and  gratified  to  have  him  seek  his 
daughter,  received  him  joyfully,  and  detained  him  as 
long  as  possible,  until  near  the  close  of  the  fourth 
day.  Setting  out  with  his  concubine  and  his  servant, 
the  man  passed  by  the  city  of  the  Jebusites  and  made 
his  way,  as  he  pressed  on,  to  Gibeah  of  Benjamin, 
which  he  reached  late  in  the  evening.  But  for  an  old 
man  he  might  perforce  have  spent  the  night  in  the 
public  square.  What  this  would  have  meant,  the 
sequel  of  the  story  only  too  clearly  reveals.  As  it 
was,  a  rabble  of  base  fellows  surrounded  the  house, 
calling  for  the  stranger,  that  they  might  vilely  abuse 
him.  At  most,  their  importunities  and  threats  se¬ 
cured  only  the  concubine.  They  so  maltreated  and 
outraged  her  that  she  died  toward  morning,  after 
they  had  left.  The  Levite,  finding  her  body  without 

1  Moore,  Judges,  I.  C.,  p.  402  ff. ;  Judges ,  P.,  p.  92  ff.  The 
story  as  we  have  it  does  not  belong  to  the  early  years  of  the  settle¬ 
ment.  Much  of  it  appears  to  be  very  late. 


80  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  door,  placed  it  upon  his  ass  and  took  it  home. 
He  then  cut  it  up  and  sent  the  pieces  to  the  men  of 
Ephraim  and  of  neighbouring  clans.  It  was  enough  ; 
the  clansmen,  stirred  by  the  story  of  the  outrage, 
rallied  and  wrought  vengeance  upon  Gibeah.  That 
the  men  of  Benjamin  came  to  the  defence  of  Gibeah 
seems  as  improbable  as  that  the  story  of  the  well 
nigh  complete  extermination  of  that  clan  should  be 
regarded  as  veritable  history.  They  may,  it  is  true, 
have  resented  such  interference  with  their  jurisdic¬ 
tion.  The  fact  that  in  Saul’s  day  the  clan  of  Ben¬ 
jamin  seemed  to  be  prosperous,  and  to  be  in  no  wray 
in  disfavour,  may  be  mentioned  as  against  the  sup¬ 
position  that  the  story  of  the  shattering  of  Benjamin 
as  we  have  it  in  this  narrative  is  true  to  fact.  There 
surely  is  nothing  in  the  Song  of  Deborah  or  in  1 
Samuel  to  lead  us  to  suppose  that  the  clan  of  Ben¬ 
jamin  was  greatly  reduced  in  numbers  at  this  time. 
Indeed,  quite  the  contrary  appears  to  have  been  the 
fact.  Saul  was  largely  backed  by  his  own  clan,  while 
David,  after  Saul  had  passed  away,  was  years  in  get¬ 
ting  the  better  of  Benjamin,  the  one  clan  that  clung 
to  the  House  of  Saul.  The  extent  to  which  the  story 
bears  marks  of  having  been  worked  over  allows  us 
the  benefit  of  a  doubt  at  this  point.  It  is  worthy  of 
note  that  most  of  the  additions  are  in  the  general 
style  of  the  post- exilic  writers.  We  must  conclude 
that  they  were  very  late. 

According  to  one  account,  the  Benjaminites  who 
were  left  wifeless,  for  the  women  appear  to  have 
suffered  total  extermination  as  the  narrative  sug¬ 
gests,  were  permitted  to  bear  away  the  maidens  of 


CHARACTERISTIC  STORIES 


81 


Shiloh  as  they  came  forth  at  the  feast  of  the  vintage  ; 
according  to  another  account,  the  inhabitants  of  Ja- 
besh-Gilead  were  put  to  the  sword  and  four  hundred 
virgins  who  were  spared  were  given  them.  Proba¬ 
bly,  both  stories  grew  out  of  the  effort  of  late  editors 
to  explain  the  prosperity  of  a  clan  which,  according 
to  story,  had  been  thought  to  be  shattered  in  their 
ancient .  past.  The  story  of  the  rape  of  the  virgins 
of  Shiloh  is  full  of  local  colour,  and  furnishes  socio¬ 
logical  data  of  great  value,  but  both  stories  appear 
to  be  old  and  to  emphasise  characteristics  of  an  early 
time.  The  fact  that  they  were  late  as  literary  com¬ 
positions  as  we  now  have  them,  does  not  forbid  our 
supposing  them  to  have  had  an  early  origin  in  a  less 
finished  form. 

The  one  lesson  which  the  outrage  of  Gibeah  taught 
Israel  was  a  lesson  which,  they  seemed  not  to  need 
to  learn,  that  the  laws  of  hospitality  were  sacred  and 
inviolable.  It  is  probable  that  it  was  because  the 
outrage  violated  their  social  sentiments  rather  than 
because  they  wished  to  make  an  example  of  Gibeah 
that  they  so  summarily  punished  them.  Men  be¬ 
longing  to  such  a  social  stage  do  not  usually  inflict 
punishment  for  disciplinary  purposes,  as  they  do  not 
trouble  themselves  to  discover  the  real  culprits.  The 
innocent  must  suffer  with  the  guilty.  As  a  story  re¬ 
vealing  the  social  atmosphere  of  the  time,  the  outrage 
of  Gibeah  has  value.  It  should  be  looked  at  as  mir¬ 
roring  in  remarkable  ways  the  rougher  side  of  the  life 
of  that  early  period,  together  with  some  of  its  more 
hopeful  features. 

Our  third  and  final  story,  here  considered  as  spe- 


82  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


cially  characteristic  of  the  time,  belongs  to  the  latter 
part  of  Saul’s  career,  though  it  has  to  do  more  par¬ 
ticularly  with  David,  who  is  living  a  semi-nomadic 
life  of  outlawry  in  the  south.  A  man  by  the  name 
of  Nabal,  who  appears  to  be  wrell-to-do,  is  making 
merry  in  sheep-shearing  time,  after  the  manner  of 
pastoral  people,  to  whom  the  season  ordinarily  is  a 
time  of  special  festivity.1  David,  as  a  sort  of  Bedouin 
sheik  who  has  restrained  his  own  men,  no  small  thing 
for  him  to  do  under  the  circumstances,  and  who  has 
also  had  an  eye  for  Nabal’s  welfare  in  other  directions, 
as  one  strong  enough  to  protect  him  from  the  dep¬ 
redations  of  roving  bands,  sends  to  him,  as  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  customs  of  the  time  he  had  a  right  to  do, 
asking  a  gratuity.  The  ten  young  men  sent  greet 
Nabal  in  the  name  of  their  leader,  saying  unto  him : 
“  Peace  be  unto  thee,  and  prosperity  to  thine  house 
and  to  all  that  thou  hast.  Behold  our  leader  has 
heard  that  the  shearers  are  with  thee.  Now,  thy 
shepherds  have  been  writh  us  and  we  did  them  no 
harm,  neither  wras  aught  missing  unto  them  all  the 
time  they  were  in  Carmel.  Ask  thy  young  men  and 
they  will  tell  thee.  Wherefore  let  us  now  find  grace 
in  thy  sight ;  for  we  are  come  in  a  good  day,  a  day 
of  festivity.  Give,  we  pray  thee,  whatsoever  cometh 
to  thine  hand  unto  thy  servants  and  to  David,  thy 
son.” 

The  churlish  Nabal  is  not  one  to  appreciate  any  fav¬ 
ours  shown  him;  he  is  not  minded  to  respond  to  this 
very  reasonable  request.  He  can  even  roughly,  with 
words,  insult  the  sheik  and  his  men  :  “  Who  is  David  ? 

1  1  Sam.  xxv.  2  ff.  See  here  Smith’s  Samuel,  I.  C. 


CHARACTERISTIC  STORIES 


83 


Who  is  this  son  of  Jesse?  There  be  many  lawless 
men  in  these  days,  slaves  who  break  away  from  their 
masters.  Shall  I  then  take  my  bread,  and  my  water, 
and  the  flesh  that  I  have  provided  for  my  shearers, 
and  give  it  to  men  who  come  I  know  not  whence  ?  ” 
The  words  are  purposely  made  as  insulting  as 
possible. 

Chagrined,  David’s  young  men  return  and  report  the 
interview.  Now,  indeed,  there  will  be  no  restraining 
of  the  men,  even  if  the  sheik  is  minded  to  restrain  them, 
but  he  is  not.  Word  is  passed  around :  “  Gird  ye  on 
every  man  his  sword.”  David  and  four  hundred  of 
his  men  arm  themselves  and  sally  forth,  leaving  two 
hundred  to  guard  their  stronghold  and  their  belong¬ 
ings. 

In  the  meantime,  Abigail,  the  comely,  wise,  and  effi¬ 
cient  wife  of  the  old  churl,1  has  heard  all  that  has  oc¬ 
curred  at  home.  She  is  not  left  in  ignorance  of  David’s 
chivalrous  treatment,  if,  indeed,  she  was  not  before 
cognisant  of  it :  “  Behold,  David  sent  young  men  out 
from  his  stronghold  among  the  hills,  out  in  the  wilder¬ 
ness,  to  salute  our  master,  and  he  flew  at  them  and 
shamefully  answered  them.  Thou  knowest  that 
David’s  men  have  been  good  to  us.  They  did  not  in 
any  way  harm  us ;  we  missed  nothing  as  long  as  we 
were  near  them  shepherding  our  flocks.  They  were 
a  wall  unto  us  both  by  day  and  by  night,  all  the  time 
we  were  with  them.  Now,  therefore,  know  and  con¬ 
sider  what  you  will  do ;  for  evil  is  assuredly  deter¬ 
mined  against  our  master  and  against  all  his  house ; 

1  She  was  probably  the  younger  of  his  wives.  Such  a  man  in 
those  days  was  sure  to  be  a  polygamist. 


84  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


and  he  is  so  unreasonable  that  one  cannot  advise 
him.”  There  is  no  time  for  delay.  Abigail  must  act 
swiftly  and  wisely.  Two  hundred  loaves  are  quickly 
baked,  five  sheep  are  dressed,  skins  of  wine  are 
brought  forth,  with  large  quantities  of  corn  and  rais¬ 
ins  and  cakes  of  figs,  and  asses  are  laden  therewith. 
The  resources  at  the  disposal  of  this  woman,  who  in 
her  own  home  has  a  position  of  authority  and  can 
avail  herself  at  will  of  such,  are  ample ;  yet  the  quan¬ 
tities  taken,  though  generous,  are  only  enough  to  suf¬ 
fice  for  the  immediate  needs  of  David’s  band.  It  is 
thus  that  she  would  refresh  them  and  predispose  their 
sheik  to  listen  to  her  words.  Nabal,  to  be  sure,  is 
kept  in  ignorance,  perhaps  the  more  easily  because  a 
drunken  debauch  may  have  followed  upon  his  dis¬ 
missal  of  the  young  men.  It  is  the  fact  that  the 
action  of  Abigail  is  that  of  a  competent  woman  who 
reveals  by  her  act  that  she  is  not  unskilled  in  affairs 
that  is  especially  to  be  noted.  It  means  much  that 
such  a  woman  could  be  conceived  of,  to  say  nothing 
of  her  being  described. 

The  attendant  servants  are  sent  on  ahead  with  the 
supplies,  while  Abigail  makes  her  way  tremblingly 
toward  David.  While  thus  going  she  halts  by  the 
way  in  a  shady  covert  under  a  hill-side.  David  comes 
up  with  his  men,  cherishing  his  grievance  and  excusing 
himself  for  the  vengeance  which  he  proposes  to  wreak 
upon  Nabal :  “  Surely  in  vain  have  I  kept  all  that 
this  churl  hath  here  in  the  wilderness,  so  that  nothing 
was  missed  of  all  that  belonged  to  him ;  and  now  be¬ 
hold  he  hath  requited  me  evil  for  good.  God  do  so 
to  David,  and  more  also,  if  I  leave  of  all  that  pertain- 


CHARACTERISTIC  STORIES 


85 


eth  unto  him  by  the  morning  light  so  much  as  one 
male  child.”  Abigail,  so  soon  as  she  beholds  David, 
lights  off  her  ass,  and  making  her  way  to  him,  pros¬ 
trates  herself  before  him  upon  the  ground.  She  takes 
upon  herself  the  blame  for  the  treatment  which 
David’s  men  had  received,  admitting  with  perfect 
candour,  and  not  without  a  humorous  touch,  the  folly 
of  her  husband,  and  pleads  for  forgiveness.  As  a 
magnanimous  man  David  vouchsafes  her  request,  and 
accepting  her  gift,  sends  her  back  with  his  blessing. 

Nothing  is  said  upon  her  return  to  her  carousing 
lord,  but  when  in  the  morning  she  tells  him  all,  his 
heart  fails  him,  he  is  stricken  as  one  who  has  had  an 
apoplectic  shock.  Ten  days  thereafter  he  dies.  Later, 
when  David  learns  what  has  happened,  he  sends  ser¬ 
vants  to  Abigail  to  inform  her  that  he  proposes  to 
wed  her.  Nothing  loath,  she  hies  her,  with  five  of 
her  damsels,  to  her  new-found  lord,  not  waiting  for 
him  to  come  to  her.  As  a  story  this  is  not  as  true  to 
the  early  time  as  that  of  Samson’s  Timnath  experi¬ 
ence;  yet,  as  compared  with  the  more  finished  prose 
idyl  of  Genesis  xxiv.,  the  wonderful  story  of  the 
courtship  of  Rebekah,  it  bears  the  marks  of  an  earlier 
hand,  and  presents  us  data  that  belong  more  surely 
to  the  early  period. 

These  three  stories  which  have  been  considered 
here  are  so  characteristic  of  the  period  we  are  study¬ 
ing  that  they  need  to  be  read  again  and  again  until 
their  very  atmosphere  is  felt.  It  has  been  an  effort 
for  many  undoubtedly  to  realise  that  the  first  is  as 
characteristic  of  the  time  as  the  other  two.  Of  the 
three  we  must  give  it  the  preference,  though  the 


86  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


others  should  by  no  means  be  lightly  regarded.  With 
these,  others  might  very  profitably  have  been  studied, 
as,  for  example,  the  story  of  the  taboo  placed  by  Saul 
upon  food,  which  taboo  came  near  to  being  the  death 
of  Jonathan,  but  it  seems  hardly  necessary  to  bring 
together  here  stories  that  elsewhere  in  this  volume 
are  made  extensive  use  of  in  the  way  of  illustration. 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE  RELIGION  OF  THE  PEOPLE 

The  peoples  among  whom  these  Hebrew  clans 
dwelt  were  wanting  in  unity.  There  may  have  been 
a  kinship  of  race,  but  religion  was  not  among  them, 
as  among  the  Hebrews,  the  same  unifying  force. 
Not  one  Baal  but  many  Baalim  kept  them  apart  as 
cities  and  separated  them  from  the  people  of  Yahweh. 
They  might  come  together  when  the  growth  of  the 
Hebrews  seemed  to  imperil  them ;  there  might  at 
least  be  formed  now  and  then  a  confederacy  of  a  few 
cities,^  and  in  a  campaign  like  that  under  Sisera’s 
leadership  they  might  seek  to  humble  these  foreign 
clans,  while  their  commercial  affairs  might  keep 
them  from  isolating  themselves  from  one  another. 
Even  their  common  worship  of  the  various  local 
Baalim  might  beget  similar  sentiments  and  might 
make  it  possible  for  them  as  individuals  to  feel  at 
home  in  one  another’s  cities.  But  as  there  was  no 
national  life  in  the  true  sense  of  the  term,  so  there 
was  no  national  God  ;  indeed,  we  may  say,  there  was 
no  national  life,  because  there  was  no  one  God  around 
whom  their  sentiments  could  crystallise.  The  Baal 
of  a  city  and  its  dependencies  seems  to  have  been 
the  recognised  God  of  the  people  of  that  particular 
group ;  as  such  he  was  worshipped  as  the  Lord  of 
husbandry,  upon  whom  they  depended  for  their 

87 


88  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


crops  as  agriculturalists.  In  the  cultivation  of  field 
and  vineyard  he  was  the  power  back  of  nature  who 
had  it  in  his  hands  to  give  or  to  withhold,  and  inas¬ 
much  as  they  depended  largely  upon  husbandry, 
their  worship  as  a  people  was  chiefly  a  worship  of 
Baal  and  his  associate  Astarte.  Life  was,  for  the 
most  part,  summed  up  in  terms  of  service  to  these ; 
especially  was  the  thought  of  generation  associated 
with  them  and  their  worship.  The  fruitfulness  of 
field  and  beast  and  man  depended  upon  their  being 
propitious.  All  this  opened  the  way  for  licentious 
rites  and  ceremonies  which  at  first  as  instituted  may 
have  been  designed  to  further  the  very  ends  desired 
and  sought,  but  which  in  time  may  have  led,  and  ap¬ 
parently  did  lead,  to  carnivals  of  lust. 

The  Hebrew  clans  when  they  entered  Canaan  came 
very  naturally  to  regard  the  local  Baalim  as  the  pro¬ 
prietors  of  the  soil,  and  fell  into  Canaanitish  ways,1 
looking  to  these  local  gods  for  success  as  agricul¬ 
turalists  and  worshipping  them ;  but  quite  apart 
from  this  disposition  to  acknowledge  these  local 
Baalim  as  the  proprietors  of  the  soil,  and  as  such  the 
givers  of  the  produce  of  the  field  and  the  vineyard, 
was  that  necessary  intercourse  with  them  through 
their  relations,  commercial  and  social,  with  their 
neighbours.  Professor  Moore  says  very  truly  :  “  The 
religious  exclusiveness  of  the  ancient  world  was  pos¬ 
sible  only  upon  terms  of  complete  non-intercourse.”  2 

1  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  338;  Hastings* 
Dictionary ,  vol.  i.,  p.  167  ff.  ;  Smith,  Rel.  of  the  Sera .,  pp.  94  ff., 
336,  etc.;  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  Ex.,  chaps,  i.  and  ii. 

2  Moore,  Judges ,  I.  C.,  p.  83.  See  also  Appendix  VIII. 


THE  RELIGION  OF  THE  PEOPLE 


89 


Inasmuch  as  the  Hebrews  did  not  isolate  themselves, 
their  intercourse  with  the  Canaanites  meant  fellow¬ 
ship  with  their  gods.  Yahweh  was  their  own  peculiar 
God,  and  he  was  a  God  of  thunder  and  of  tempest, 
fierce  and  threatening,  a  war  God.  In  times  of  con¬ 
flict  he  was  Yahweh  of  hosts,  and  he  seemed  to  come 
up  from  the  desert  to  fight  for  them  and  give  them 
success  over  their  enemies.  They  may  have  acknowl¬ 
edged  their  dependence  upon  the  many  local  Baalim, 
but  when  it  came  to  warfare,  their  confidence  in  their 
Yahweh  of  hosts  was  all- controlling  and  all-impelling. 

As  there  had  been  in  their  wanderings  a  tent  of 
tryst  without  the  camp  in  which  Yahweh  was  in¬ 
quired  of,  so,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose,  there  were 
later  houses  of  Yahweh  in  Bethel  and  in  Bliiloh. 
Perhaps  in  Gilgal  and  in  other  sacred  places  there 
may  have  been  a  house  or  shrine  whither  the  people 
could  go  in  times  of  perplexity.  An  annual  feast 
seems  to  have  brought  many  of  the  people  together 
at  these  sanctuaries,  where  in  the  common  worship  of 
Yahweh  and  in  a  common  meal  they  might  rejoice 
together.  Levites  appear  to  have  early  come  to 
serve  at  these  and  more  private  shrines.  Men  known 
as  men  of  Yahweh  rather  than  “  Messengers  of  Yah¬ 
weh,”  for  this  latter  conception  belongs  to  a  later  day, 
stand  forth  somewhat  dimly  as  having  an  honoured 
and  influential  place  among  the  members  of  the  clans, 
but  it  is  not  until  near  the  close  of  the  period  that  one 
of  these,  Samuel,  makes  an  impression  upon  the  liter¬ 
ature.  He  is  to  us  significant,  not  so  much  for  what 
he  was  as  because  he  indicates  what  certain  men  must 
have  been  at  an  earlier  time.  These  men  seem  to 


90  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


have  sustained  relations  to  individuals  rather  than  to 
the  clan.  As  such  they  may  not  have  done  much  to 
bring  the  people  together  and  socialise  them,  except 
where  as  prominent  men  they  lived  at  local  shrines. 
Whether  covenants  were  made  by  worshippers  among 
themselves  and  with  their  God  is  an  important  ques¬ 
tion  that  should  be  answered  affirmatively.  When  so 
answered,  the  answer  is  seen  to  have  an  important, 
even  vital,  bearing  upon  the  social  side  of  the  peo¬ 
ple’s  lives.  At  Shecliem  and  at  other  places  the 
Baal  was  known  as  Baal-berith,  the  Lord  of  a  cov¬ 
enant.  So  Yahweh  may  early  have  been  known. 
Such  use  of  their  God  would  naturally  commend  itself 
to  the  Hebrews  when  weary  of  war  or  of  controversy. 
In  their  common  life  as  Hebrews,  and  to  considerable 
extent  in  their  contact  with  otner  people,  such  cov¬ 
enants  as  the  covenant  of  blood,  the  covenant  of  salt, 
and  the  threshold  covenant  were  probably  not  un¬ 
known. 

Images,  those  of  Yahweh  and  other  gods,  were  ap¬ 
parently  used.  Gideon  makes  and  uses  an  ephod- 
idol,  and  when  the  men  of  Dan  are  migrating,  they 
come  upon  a  local  shrine,  only  to  lay  hands  upon  it, 
as  we  have  seen,  and  take  it  and  all  its  appurten¬ 
ances,  including  the  Levite  who  officiated  thereat, 
north  with  them. 

Sacrifices  were  often  made,  not  alone  when  domestic 
animals  were  slaughtered,  but  at  other  times,  as  feel¬ 
ing  or  circumstances  seemed  to  suggest.  Even 
human  sacrifices  were  not  unknown.  The  daughter 
of  Jephthah  was  offered  in  fulfilment  of  a  solemn 
vow.  This  is  significant ;  though  it  is  mentioned  in 


THE  RELIGION  OF  THE  PEOPLE 


91 


sucli  a  way  as  to  leave  the  impression  that  members 
of  one’s  family  or  one’s  clan  were  seldom  slaughtered. 
Personal  enemies  or  enemies  of  the  clan,  as,  for  ex¬ 
ample,  captives  taken  in  war,  probably  formed  the 
major  part  of  the  victims.  Abimelech  so  offers  the 
seventy  sons  of  Jerubbaal,  thus  avoiding  the  avenger 
of  blood. 

In  thus  considering  the  religion  of  these  Hebrew 
clans  in  a  general  way,  our  chief  concern  is  the  social 
aspects  of  it.  What  influence  had  it  upon  the  social 
life  of  the  people?  So  far  as  the  worship  was 
that  of  Canaanite  deities,  it  must  have  tended  to  pro¬ 
duce  friendly  feelings  as  a  rule  on  the  part  of  their 
neighbours,  especially  as  it  usually  meant  the  enrich¬ 
ment  of  their  local  shrines.  This  was  undoubtedly 
their  way  of  levying  tribute  upon  the  members  of 
these  Hebrew  clans.  But  if  there  were  gains,  there 
were  also  disastrous  consequences.  The  worship  of 
female  deities  at  these  shrines,  the  constant  associa¬ 
tion  of  the  thought  of  generation  with  them,  and  the 
prostitution  of  women  who  served  as  priestesses, 
tended  to  lower  socially  and  morally  all  who  partici¬ 
pated  in  their  worship.  “  Of  the  cultus  of  Astarte 
we  know  comparatively  little.  Religious  prostitution 
was  not  confined  to  the  temple  of  Astarte,  nor  to  the 
worship  of  female  divinities.  Num.  xxv.  1-5  ;  Amos 
ii.  7 ;  Deut.  xxiii.  17,  18,  etc.,  show  that  in  Israel 
similar  practices  infected  even  the  worship  of  Yah- 
we.  There  is  no  doubt,  however,  that  the  cultus  of 
Astarte  was  saturated  with  these  abominations.”  1 

The  service  of  Yahweh  was  of  a  purer  kind,  partly 

1  G.  F.  M.  in  the  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  338. 


92  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 

because  no  female  deity  was  associated  with  him ; 
though  as  the  God  of  war  he  must  often  have  been 
thought  of  as  cruel  and  bloodthirsty.  Here,  too,  was 
a  real  centre  of  social  fellowship  and  unity  which  con¬ 
tained  vast  promise  of  good  to  these  imperfectly 
welded  clans.  Idols  may  have  been  used  as  images 
of  Yahweh  that  tended  to  localise  him,  but,  after  all 
to  the  members  of  these  clans  Yahweh  was  one,  and 
as  such  the  common  property  of  them  all.  Nowhere 
does  this  come  out  more  clearly  or  more  beautifully 
than  in  the  battle  ode  of  Judges  v.  There  is  here  no 
abstract  thought ;  such  conceptions  were  far  from  the 
author’s  mind ;  but  there  is  a  common  ownership  in 
Yahweh,  a  common  recognition  of  him,  and  a  com¬ 
mon  praise  of  him.  In  no  other  passage  can  we  get 
a  truer  conception  of  what  Yahweh  was  to  these  He¬ 
brews.  And  it  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  while  he  is 
addressed  reverently,  there  is  revealed  a  familiarity  of 
tone  and  a  joyousness  that  suggests  the  thought  that 
their  religion,  and  their  literature  which  was  allied 
closely  to  their  religion,  was  a  great  socialiser.1  Con¬ 
duct  and  character  may  have  been  largely  a  matter  of 
clan  loyalty,  but  they  were  what  they  were  because  of 
what  their  God  was  conceived  by  them  to  be.  He 
was  larger  than  clan,  as  he  was  above  clan ;  and  so  he 
could  inspire  and  gladden  them.  If  there  "was  not 
yet  a  genuine  affection  for  him,  there  was  at  least  rev¬ 
erence  and  pride  in  him  as  the  highest  and  holiest 
being  of  whom  they  knew  or  could  conceive. 

1  On  the  character  of  Yahweh  in  early  Israel,  see  Encyc.  Brit. 
(Wellhausen),  vol.  xiii. ,  p.  399.  On  the  growth  in  the  ethical  char¬ 
acter  of  Yahweh  worship,  see  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  Ex p.  36  ft. 


THE  RELIGION  OF  THE  PEOPLE 


93 


The  fact  that  their  God  seemed  to  require  of  them 
human  sacrifices  need  not  be  considered  strange.  To 
the  Israelites  there  was  nothing  peculiarly  revolting 
in  such  sacrifices,  for  they  had  not  a  profound  con¬ 
ception  of  the  dignity  and  worth  of  human  life.  The 
value  of  it,  as  compared  with  animal  life  did  not 
appear  to  them,  as  it  did  not  to  other  peoples  of  the 
time. 

But  while  we  admit  that  Yahwism  was  on  its  way 
toward  something  higher  and  purer,  and  was  already 
a  beneficent  force  in  Israel  as  compared  with  other 
and  more  debasing  types  of  religion,  we  must  remem¬ 
ber  that  among  these  Semites  there  were  unquestion¬ 
ably  relics  of  a  primitive  polytheism  that  must  have 
held  back  socially  the  mass  of  the  people.  This  is 
not  the  place  to  enter  into  a  discussion  of  the  tera- 
phim.  That  they  were  household  gods  is  the  opinion 
of  many.  Kittel  speaks  of  the  teraphim  cult  as  “  a 
relic  of  the  ancient  Semitic  worship  of  ancestors.” 
Others,  as  G.  F.  Moore,  are  inclined  to  question 
whether  the  teraphim  were  ever  so  used.  We  may 
have  to  conclude  that  they  were  household  idols,  not 
necessarily  used,  perhaps  never  used,  in  ancestor 
worship,  that  remained  from  polytheistic  times.  So 
commonly  were  they  used,  and  so  often  do  we  find 
mention  of  them,  that  we  cannot  forbear  hoping  that 
later  research  may  reveal  to  us  their  real  signifi¬ 
cance.  If  it  should  appear  that  they  are  relics  of  an 
earlier  polytheism  among  the  Hebrews,  they  are  but 
what  we  might  expect  to  find.  Here,  as  well  as  at 
many  other  points  in  our  study  of  the  social  life  of 
the  early  Hebrews,  it  is  necessary  to  make  large  use 


94  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  the  comparative  method.  Only  by  so  doing  can  we 
understand  the  meagre  data  at  our  disposal. 

That  totemism  was  common  in  early  Israel,  and 
that  it  played  a  large  part  in  the  social  life  of  the 
time,  seems  probable.  The  mere  mention  of  it  here 
is  enough  to  suggest  to  the  reader  that  a  careful 
study  of  the  religion  of  Israel  reveals  the  fact  that  our 
old  conceptions  of  the  religious  life  of  the  time  must 
be  reconstructed,  otherwise  we  cannot  understand  the 
peculiar  nature  of  its  influence  upon  the  social  life  of 
the  period.  The  study  of  totemism  among  other  peo¬ 
ples,  as  the  North  American  Indians  and  Esquimaux, 
is  helpful  here ;  but  much  more  suggestive  is  the 
study  of  totemism  among  the  early  Arabians  as 
brought  out  by  W.  Robertson  Smith  in  his  Religion 
of  the  Semites.  That  Israel  was  emerging  from  a 
totemistic  stage  of  social  life  at  the  time  of  the  settle¬ 
ment  is  probable ;  though  how  long  the  people  were 
in  ridding  themselves  of  its  thraldom,  it  is  impossible 
to  say.  It  is  significant  that  the  names  of  some  of 
the  clans  appear  to  have  been  totem  names. 


CHAPTEK  X 


THE  RISE  OF  NATIONALISM 

If  the  various  Hebrew  clans  entered  the  land  of 
Canaan  at  or  about  the  same  time,  crossing  over  the 
Jordan  from  the  eastern  hill  country,  they  may  have 
been  actuated  by  a  sense  of  their  common  kinship  ; 
but  so  independent  were  certain  groups  of  one  an¬ 
other  at  the  time  of  settlement,  that  it  is  difficult  for 
us  to  believe  that  there  was  among  them  a  real  unity 
of  purpose  and  of  sentiment  such  as  a  pronounced 
national  consciousness  might,  had  it  been  possessed, 
have  made  possible.  It  has  been  surmised  that  their 
desert  life  unified  Israel ;  even  Kuenen  speaks  of  it 
as  making  for  unity,  though  “as  a  temporary  co-oper¬ 
ation.”  That  there  was  a  trysting-place,  with  the  Ark 
as  the  seat  of  Yah  web,  during  their  desert  life  appears 
probable  ;  though  whether  it  was  Kadesh-barnea  or 
some  other  sanctuary  does  not  indubitably  appear. 
It  seems  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  various 
clans  journeyed  about  the  Arabian  desert  together ; 
it  is  likely  that  they  separated  and  wandered  about 
for  pasturage.  Still,  a  central  sanctuary  would  serve 
to  unify  them,  though  its  power  over  the  individual 
clans  to  whom  their  clan  organisation  and  their  com¬ 
mon  action  in  endeavour  and  in  sacrifice  were  of  su¬ 
preme  concern  may  not  have  been  great,  especially  if 

95 


96  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Yahwism  was,  as  Buclde  contends,  the  religion  of  the 
Kenites,  to  which  Moses  introduced  them.  Until  we 
know  more  of  the  religion  of  the  Hebrews  in  Egypt, 
it  is  hardly  safe  for  us  to  speak  confidently  of  the 
unity  of  Israel  during  the  bondage.  Though  a  com¬ 
mon  oppression  and  consciousness  of  a  common  ori¬ 
gin  may  measurably  have  kept  them  together, 
whether  a  common  monotheism  did,  now  seems  ques¬ 
tionable.  That  there  was  a  sense  of  nationality 
earlier  than  the  monarchy,  and  an  inner  unity  back 
of  the  settlement,  as  Wellhausen  thinks,  we  may  admit, 
as  we  may  also  that  Moses  was  its  author.  We  may 
say  with  him  that  the  basis  for  the  unification  of  the 
tribes  must  certainly  have  been  laid  before  the  con¬ 
quest  of  Canaan  proper ;  but  during  the  early  part  of 
the  period  of  the  Judges  there  was  more  to  segregate 
the  Hebrews  than  to  unite  them.  The  Canaanites 
were  wanting  in  unity,  so  that  only  on  rare  occasions 
were  the  Hebrew  clans  forced  to  act  together,1  and 
then  only  a  part  of  them  at  most,  as  in  the  time  of 
Deborah.2  The  Judges  as  local  vindicators  had  little 
need,  as  a  rule,  of  a  united  Israel ;  if  they  could  rally 
a  few  thousand  clansmen,  they  were  reasonably  sure 
of  a  victory.  The  most  conspicuous  note  of  unity 
that  was  struck  before  the  Philistines  came  in  force 
upon  the  stage,  was  in  the  Song  of  Deborah,  and,  it 
may  be,  in  the  campaign  against  Sisera  which  it  cele- 

1  Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  398  (Wellhausen).  u  It  was  most  es¬ 
pecially  in  the  graver  moments  of  its  history  that  Israel  awoke  to 
full  consciousness  of  itself  and  of  Jehovah.”  See  also  Schultz, 
Old  Test.  Theology ,  vol.  i. ,  p.  146  f. 

*  Judges  v.  13-18  j^see  also  Judges  vi.  34,  etc. 


THE  RISE  OF  NATIONALISM 


97 


brated.  Here  Yaliweh  is  the  God  whose  name  forms 
a  rallying  cry.1  That  it  was  so,  is  significant.  It  sug¬ 
gests  that  as  the  Hebrews  became  more  and  more 
distinctively  the  people  of  Yahweh,  they  realised 
somewhat  their  oneness. 

But  nationalism,  in  the  largest  sense  of  the  term, 
became  a  fact  when  the  growing  Philistine  power 
threatened  their  enslavement  and  impoverishment,  if 
not  their  extermination.  It  was  the  success  of  their 
enemies,  and  especially  their  capture  of  the  Ark,2  that 
stirred  Israel  and  led  them  later  to  look  for  a  leader. 
Their  rallying  about  Saul  after  he  had  delivered 
Jabesli-Gilead  was  inevitable.  There  were  strange 
vicissitudes  of  experience  ahead  ;  some  parts  of  Israel 
were  to  feel  their  need  more  than  others,  and  the 
loyalty  of  the  people  wras  to  be  in  proportion  to  the 
service  which  this  man,  the  last  of  the  Vindicators  of 
Israel,  was  to  render  them ;  but  through  the  stress 
and  the  storm  of  the  days  of  Saul’s  unhappy  career 
there  was  emerging  a  people  more  conscious  than 
their  progenitors  of  their  oneness. 

The  rise  of  prophetism,  as  seen  in  the  prophetic 
guild  which  Samuel  did  so  much  to  foster,  further 
unified  the  people.3  As  Saul’s  sun  declined,  and  as 

1  Moore,  Judges ,  P.,  p.  44;  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  807 ; 
Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  401;  Kittel,  His.  of  the  Hebrews ,  vol.  ii., 
p.  74  f. 

2  This  loss  revealed  their  want  of  unity. — Kittel,  His.  of  the  Ileb ., 
vol.  ii.,  p.  105  if. 

3  Kuenen,  The  Rel.  of  Is.,  vol.  i.,  p.  317  f. ;  Budde,  The  Rel.  of  Is. 
to  the  Ex.,  pp.  90,  100 ;  Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  402.  Wellhausen 
speaks  here  of  an  ecstatic  group  of  enthusiasts  provoked  by  Philis¬ 
tine  invasion. 


98  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


that  of  David  rose,  this  movement  gained  impetus,  so 
that  when  long  after  David  took  Jerusalem,  and  by  a 
wise  stroke  of  policy  made  it  his  Royal  City,  Ephraim 
and  Judah  were  apparently  becoming  one  people 
and  were,  in  becoming  so,  drawing  all  Israel  after 
them.  The  movement  was  from  the  first  uneven. 
The  progress  at  times  was  rapid,  as  at  other  times  it 
was  slow,  with  set-backs  that  were  discouraging  ;  but, 
on  the  whole,  the  political  and  social  evolution  was 
somewhat  in  the  direction  of  a  unity  of  thought 
and  sentiment.  There  were  differences  enough  in 
the  location  of  the  various  groups  to  have  led  to  a 
somewhat  different  type  of  social  life  had  it  not  been 
for  this  growing  nationalism ;  but  this  unification 
meant  oneness  of  social  life  as  did  the  slow  disinte¬ 
gration  of  the  clan  organisations  following  upon  the 
settlement.  At  no  time  during  the  period  here 
treated  could  an  Israelite  of  one  clan  have  felt  him¬ 
self  when  among  the  members  of  another  clan  a  per¬ 
fect  stranger,  but  there  may  have  been  such  differ¬ 
ences  of  sentiment  and  of  custom  as  to  have  kept 
such  a  man  from  feeling  at  home.  Until  the  time  of 
the  monarchy  the  clan  or  city  must  have  meant  more 
to  the  individual  Hebrew  than  the  larger  social  body. 
We  may  easily  believe  that  to  many  of  these  various 
clans  their  social  relations  with  certain  Semites  who 
were  not  Hebrews  meant  more  than  similar  relations 
with  those  outside  of  their  own  clan  who  were  He¬ 
brews. 


( 


PART  il 


THE  TIME  OF  THE  MONARCHY 


CHAPTER  I 


LITERARY  SOURCES  FOR  THE  PERIOD 

For  convenience  we  may  speak  of  the  social  life 
treated  in  this  second  part  as  lived  under  the  mon¬ 
archy,  though  the  Hebrews  did  not,  even  under 
David  and  Solomon,  become  one.  The  chroniclers  of 
the  time  speak  of  Israel  and  Judah  near  the  close  of 
David’s  life,  after  he  had  vainly  tried  to  unify  them, 
although  often  showing  an  unwise  partiality  for  his 
own  clan.  Though  the  line  of  cleavage  did  not  ap¬ 
pear  as  markedly  in  Solomon’s  day,  the  unification 
of  the  people  of  the  north  and  the  south  had  not  yet 
been  effected.  It  takes  more  than  a  generation  or 
two,  even  where  the  circumstances  are  peculiarly 
favourable,  to  amalgamate  peoples  having  a  divergent 
ancestry  and  divergent  traditions,  as  well  as  a  some¬ 
what  different  environment.  The  literature  of  the  two 
peoples  reveals  in  part  their  differences  ;  while  the 
location  of  the  northern  clans  kept  them  in  closer 
touch  with  outside  life,  as  it  also  enabled  them  to 
spread  down  into  the  rich  plains,  as  they  got  the 
better  of  their  neighbours,  largely  through  their  nu¬ 
merical  increase  and  their  superior  enterprise  and 
thrift.  Judah  meanwhile  was  left  for  the  most  part 
to  her  barren  hills,  upon  which  the  people  were 

forced  to  maintain  themselves  by  means  of  their 

101 


102  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


flocks  and  herds,  or  by  the  absorption  of  near¬ 
by  nomadic  peoples,  as  the  Calebites  and  the  Ken- 
ites,  as  well  as  the  Jebusites  and  others,  among 
whom  they  had  come  as  intruders.  The  ease  with 
which  the  northern  clans  swung  off  by  themselves 
under  Jeroboam  reveals  their  want  of  oneness  with 
Judah,  to  whom  they  must  have  been  in  point  of 
numbers  largely  superior.  To  bring  about  the  sev¬ 
erance  of  the  outward  bond  of  unity,  there  was  little 
need  of  the  traditional  stupidity  and  obstinacy  of 
Rehoboam. 

But  though  up  to  the  time  of  the  final  break-up  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,  in  722  B.C.,  by  Sargon  of  Assyria, 
the  monarchy  was  dual,  and  though  the  Hebrews  of  the 
two  parts  of  Canaan  had  their  separate  lines  of  kings 
and  were  much  of  the  time  little  inclined  to  a  mutual 
interchange  of  the  courtesies  of  life,  they  may  never¬ 
theless  be  studied  as  one  people  from  the  stand-point 
of  the  sociologist.  It  was  not  until  wealth  began  to 
pile  up  under  Jeroboam  II.,  through  foreign  conquests 
and  the  widening  industrial  life  of  his  people,  that  the 
type  of  social  life  changed  radically  in  the  north  as 
compared  with  the  south.  Even  then  the  proud  and 
vain  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  seem  to  have  vied,  with 
some  appearance  of  success,  with  the  "wealthy  nabobs 
of  Samaria.  Besides,  after  all,  the  richer  fruitage  in 
the  realm  of  literature  and  religion  which  has  come 
to  us  from  the  Hebrews  is  in  itself  our  warrant  for  a 
study  of  their  social  life  in  its  entirety,  regardless  of 
geographical  boundaries.  Such  a  study  need  not 
conceal  the  social  differences  in  ideals  and  in  life,  for 
the  emphasising  of  some  of  the  more  pronounced  of 


LITERARY  SOURCES  FOR  THE  PERIOD  103 


these  will  but  add  to  the  picturesqueness  and  interest 
of  our  narrative. 

The  problem  which  the  question  of  sources  for  the 
social  life  of  this  period  presents  is  most  intricate. 
The  difficulty  of  the  problem  is  in  this  instance  en¬ 
hanced  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  so  much  in  the  way 
of  textual  criticism  of  the  Old  Testament  remains  to 
be  done.  Had  we  in  hand  the  volume  on  The 
Kings ,  by  the  Rev.  Francis  Brown,  D.D.,  and  that 
on  The  Chronicles ,  by  the  Rev.  Edward  L.  Curtis, 
D.D.,  both  of  which  volumes  are  sure  to  maintain 
unimpaired  the  reputation  of  the  series  of  which  they 
are  to  constitute  a  part,  our  labour  would  be  materially 
reduced.  As  it  is,  the  author  has  been  thrown  back 
upon  himself,  and  has  been  forced  to  do  much  of  his 
grubbing  in  the  text  unaided.  This  accounts  largely 
for  the  paucity  of  references  to  first-class  authorities 
in  this  part  as  compared  with  Part  I.  of  this  volume. 
Few  textual  helps  of  a  high  order  as  we  possess 
here  there  are  some  that  deserve  special  mention. 
Smith’s  Samuel,  already  named  in  connection  with 
Part  I. ;  Budde’s  The  Books  of  Samuel ,  in  The 
Polychrome  Hebrew  Text ;  Kittel’s  The  Chronicles ,  in 
the  same  text ;  Driver’s  Introduction  to  the  Literature 
of  the  Old  Testament ;  G.  A.  Smith’s  Isaiah ,  and  his 
first  volume  in  The  Twelve  Prophets  ;  and  Dillmann’s 
Genesis  are  invaluable ;  while  throughout,  but  espe¬ 
cially  in  connection  with  the  Books  of  Samuel,  the 
Septuagint  cannot  be  dispensed  with. 

But  what  of  the  sources  which  must  be  studied  by 
the  student  of  the  English  Bible  with  such  helps  as 
he  may  at  present  be  able  to  command  ?  How  ex- 


104  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


tensive  are  they,  and  of  just  how  much  critical  value 
as  furnishing  tolerably  reliable  data  of  a  sociological 
character?  Such  questions  must  be  faced  at  the  out¬ 
set  by  the  student  of  this  period.  Upon  the  answer 
which  he  gives,  depends  the  value  very  considerably 
of  the  work  done.  Unless  the  student  be  possessed 
of  considerable  critical  acumen,  he  must  fail.  He 
should  accept  only  the  most  careful  analysis  of  the 
strata  of  the  different  historical  books  and  the  legal 
codes,  and  should  admit  as  literature  contemporary 
thereto  only  that  which  is  indubitable.  Having,  how¬ 
ever,  done  this,  he  may  to  a  considerable  extent  ig¬ 
nore  the  finer  points  as  to  dates  ;  for,  inasmuch  as  the 
period  covered  is  nearly  four  centuries,  and  the  social 
life  is  to  be  looked  at  in  the  large,  he  cannot  go  far 
astray  in  marshalling  his  data.  Rejecting  all  that 
belongs  to  the  earlier  period,  he  must  with  as  firm  a 
hand  set  aside  all  that  shows  unmistakable  marks  of 
the  Deuteronomist  and  Priestly  Writer.  Within 
these  limits  he  has  considerable  freedom,  and  may 
advance  with  reasonable  confidence.  For  example, 
accepting  the  J  and  E  patriarchal  stories  of  Genesis, 
as  now  we  are  bound  to  do,  as  late,  stories  that  as  lit¬ 
erature  were  closely  related  to  the  old  sanctuaries  of 
Shechem,  Bethel,  Hebron,  and  Beer-sheba,  belonging 
to  the  ninth  or,  possibly,  the  eighth  century  B.C.,  he 
may  use,  at  least  in  an  illustrative  way,  their  socio¬ 
logical  data.  So,  too,  after  he  has  for  his  purposes 
rejected  the  few  parts  of  2  Samuel,  which  be¬ 
long  to  the  men  of  the  Deuteronomic  or  Priestly 
Schools,  though  he  may  feel  that  the  stories  look 
very  much  like  an  attempt  of  a  writer  subsequent  to 


LITERARY  SOURCES  FOR  THE  PERIOD  1Q5 


Solomon  who  wished  to  exalt  him  in  the  eyes  of 
later  generations,  still  he  must  admit  that  these 
stories  furnish  valuable  material  for  reconstructing, 
in  a  tentative  way  at  least,  a  fascinating  picture  of 
the  social  life  of  the  time.  If  his  attempt  prove  a 
failure,  the  fault  is  his  own. 

Let  us  look,  then,  without  going  into  any  of  the 
finer  questions  of  textual  criticism,  at  our  broad  field, 
and  view  in  a  general  way  the  rich  mass  of  material 
which  the  scholarship  of  our  day  puts  at  our  dis¬ 
posal.  We  have  2  Samuel,  which  begins  with  the 
death  of  Saul  and  the  crowning  of  David  at  He¬ 
bron.  How  rich  this  is  in  sociological  data  only 
he  can  know  who  has  read  it  critically  under  the 
lead  of  such  careful  students  as  Wellhausen,  Budde, 
Driver,  and  H.  P.  Smith.  Parts  of  2  Samuel  must 
be  handled  carefully,  if  not  ruled  out  altogether, 
because  they  belong  to  a  date  so  late  that  the  writer’s 
knowledge  of  the  social  life  of  the  time  under  con¬ 
sideration  must  have  been  fallible.  Wholly  so  it  may 
not  have  been.  Take,  for  example,  the  men  belong¬ 
ing  to  the  Deuteronomic  School.  Legitimate  wor¬ 
ship  in  Solomon’s  day  and  thereafter,  was  in  their 
thought  at  one  central  sanctuary.  In  alluding  to  the 
high  places  prior  to  Solomon,  or  in  condemning  the 
worship  which,  during  later  centuries,  was  common 
thereat,  the  Deuteronomists  may  help  us  to  under¬ 
stand  them,  for  they  were  still  in  existence  in  their 
day,  and  were  so  common  that  they  could  not  speak 
of  them  without  doing  so  out  of  the  fulness  of 
their  personal  knowledge,  though  revealing  at  the 
same  time  their  strong  bias  and  proneness  to  mis- 


106  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


interpret  history  in  the  interests  of  their  higher 
moral  ideals.  We  have  little  from  their  hand  in 
2  Samuel.  We  have  more  of  theirs  in  1  Samuel, 
which,  though  belonging  in  its  more  reliable  por¬ 
tions  to  our  first  period,  the  time  of  the  vindicat¬ 
ors,  may  here  be  used  illustratively  to  a  considerable 
extent,  because  it  has  to  do  with  a  time  so  near  the 
establishment  of  the  monarchy.  But  with  even  less 
favour  must  we  look  upon  any  priestly  or  other  exilic 
parts  of  the  book,  as,  for  example,  chapter  seven,  the 
famous  Messianic  passage,  and  the  so-called  last 
words  of  David,  which  are  even  more  innocent  of  any 
knowledge  of  the  supposed  author  and  his  time,  than 
are  the  so-called  last  words  of  Jacob  and  of  Moses, 
and  the  psalm  of  Hannah  of  their  supposed  authors 
and  their  time.  Such  sociological  data  as  they  give 
us,  and  this  may,  when  properly  understood,  be  ex¬ 
tremely  valuable,  can  be  used  by  the  student  only 
where  it  belongs,  unless,  indeed,  he  wishes  to  stultify 
his  historical  sense. 

The  Books  of  the  Kings  down  to  the  time  of  Josiah, 
641  b.c.,  that  is,  to  2  Kings,  xxi.  26,  must  be  largely 
used  by  us.  Here  again  we  have  a  rich  mine  in 
which  to  delve,  though  not  as  rich  as  2  Samuel, 
for  proportionally  it  covers  a  much  longer  period, 
and  is  to  a  considerable  extent  fragmentary.  Here, 
however,  the  Deuteronomist  revels,1  consigning  to  his 
limbo  royalty  and  people  in  a  wholesale  way,  because, 
forsooth,  they  had  used  most  freely  for  religious  and 
social  purposes  the  high  places  which  were  well  nigh 
the  only  centres  of  the  Yahweh  cult  known  to  them, 

'Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  859  ff. 


LITERARY  SOURCES  FOR  THE  PERIOD  107 


and  which,  despite  their  abuses,  and  especially  their 
sensual  excesses,  had  not  without  good  reasons  en¬ 
deared  themselves  to  the  Hebrews  during  the  long 
centuries  in  which  they  had  used  them.  To  the  Deu- 
teronomist  the  work  of  the  great  Elijah  had  counted 
for  little  or  nothing.  These  high  places  continued, 
and  they  were  evil  and  only  evil  in  their  influence. 
What  they  were  to  him  they  must,  in  his  thought, 
always  have  been.  On  the  other  hand,  the  elaborately 
constructed  temple  described  for  us  in  1  Kings  has 
absolutely  nothing  to  do  with  the  social  life  of  the 
people  of  the  period  here  treated. 

Similarly  the  Books  of  the  Chronicles  down  to 
Josiah’s  day,  that  is,  to  2  Chronicles  xxxiii.  25,  should 
be  used,  yet  with  decreasing  confidence,  for  here  we 
encounter  the  Priestly  School  at  every  step  of  the 
way,  a  School  which  was  superior  to  all  others  in  the 
freedom  with  which  it  worked  over  historical  docu¬ 
ments.  The  desire  to  advance  a  reform  could  not  be 
pleaded  by  them  as  an  excuse  ;  rather  was  the  aim  that 
of  exalting  the  temple  and  the  priestly  class,  though 
even  here  in  the  thought  of  the  School  the  incompara¬ 
ble  Yahweh,  the  God  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth, 
might  be  honoured.  The  patient  study  of  certain  por¬ 
tions  of  The  Chronicles,  especially  the  drier  statistical 
portions,  brings  to  light  some  data  that  are  not  to  be 
ignored,  as,  for  example,  the  fact  that  the  worship  of 
Baal  and  Astarte  played  a  more  important  part  in  the 
life  of  the  people  during  the  days  of  Saul  and  David 
than  the  Books  of  Samuel,  as  we  now  have  them, 
would  lead  us  to  surmise. 

Apart  from  these  professedly  historical  works,  we 


10S  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


have  the  J  and  E  narratives  of  Genesis  and  of  other 
parts  of  the  Hexateuch.  The  most  rewarding  por¬ 
tions  of  these  narratives  are  those  found  in  Gen¬ 
esis,  especially  in  the  patriarchal  stories 1  and  the 
Blessing  of  Jacob.  The  social  ideals  and  religious 
practices,  the  traditions  and  the  customs,  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  in  the  ninth  and  eighth  centuries,  come  so  strik¬ 
ingly  to  the  surface  of  these  narratives  that  when  read 
as  these  much  misunderstood  parts  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  should  be  read,  they  become  marvellously  illu¬ 
minating  and  inspiring.  They  present  to  us,  however, 
in  certain  portions,  as  in  the  unblushing,  though  un¬ 
rebuked,  disposition  of  Jacob  to  overreach,  and  in  the 
economic  and  social  policy  of  Joseph  among  the 
Egyptians,  ideals  that  the  best  men  of  the  eighth 
century,  as  Amos  and  Isaiah,  could  not  heartily  en¬ 
dorse.  Among  other  parts  of  the  Hexateuch,  the  Book 
of  the  Covenant,  Ex.  xx.  23-xxiii.  33,  the  first  legal 
code  of  the  Hebrews,  belongs  here.  Attention  should 
also  be  given  to  the  J  and  E  narratives  of  Exodus 
and  Numbers,  especially  the  parts  relating  to  the 
Exodus,  the  story  of  “  a  rebellion  of  laymen  against 
the  civil  authority,”  the  account  of  Israel  at  Kadesh 
and  their  journeyings  thence  to  the  plains  of  Moab, 
and  “  the  history  of  Balaam.  ”  2  Small  parts  of  Joshua 
appear  to  belong  here ;  so,  also,  to  go  outside  the 
Hexateuch,  do  considerable  portions  of  the  Judges. 
It  should,  of  course,  be  recognised  that  the  larger 
part  of  this  book  belongs  to  the  literature  of  this 

1  See  Appendix  VII. 

2  Driver,  Intro,  to  Lit.  of  0.  T .,  p.  55  ff.,  1st  ed. ;  p.  60  ff. 
8th  ed. 


LITERARY  SOURCES  FOR  THE  PERIOD  109 


period,  though  largely,  yet  cautiously,  used  by  us  in 
connection  with  our  study  of  the  social  life  of  the 
Hebrew  people  prior  to  the  monarchy,  because  the 
stories,  or  folk-tales,  have  to  do  with  that  time. 

As  we  come  down  into  the  eighth  century,  there  is  a 
class  of  literature,  entirely  different  from  any  we  meet 
prior  to  this  time,  which  comes  into  our  hands,  with  a 
mass  of  data  that  is  almost  wholly  sociological.  The 
great  names  of  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micali  rise 
before  us  in  a  sublimely  stirring  way.  Perhaps  no 
one  can  so  appreciate  the  moral  ideals  and  the  unself¬ 
ish  religious  enthusiasm  of  these  wonderful  teachers 
as  he  who  comes  up  to  them  from  a  careful  study  of 
the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews  during  the  centuries 
which  separated  Saul’s  day  from  theirs.  Deutero- 
Isaiali  can  be  explained,  the  Book  of  Job  is  not  un¬ 
accountable,  the  richest  of  the  devotional  literature  of 
the  Psalms  discovers  to  us  the  soil  out  of  which  it 
grew;  but  what  shall  we  say  of  these  men,  who,  if 
they  seemed  in  their  own  eyes  to  have  failed,  became 
an  inspiration  to  all  who  cherish  high  ambitions  ?  We 
may  speak  of  the  high-souled,  adorable  Jesus  as  the 
great  contradiction  of  all  history,  so  utterly  at  vari¬ 
ance  does  he  seem  to  us  to  be  with  the  life  of  his 
time  ;  but  we  may  not  forget  Amos,  the  herd  of  Tekoa, 
Hosea,  the  heart-distraught  preacher  of  the  long- 
suffering  Yah  well,  nor  the  more  finished  and  cultured 
Isaiah  and  Micah.  The  social  life  of  a  people  among 
whom  such  men  sprang  up  could  not  have  been  alto¬ 
gether  bad.  Perhaps  in  some  directions  our  ideas  of 
it  need  rectification.  Certainly  the  material  gleaned 
in  the  literature  already  mentioned  must  find  in  the 


110  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


literary  remains  of  these  men,  the  earliest  of  the 
written  prophets,  invaluable  supplementation.  We 
shall  prize  their  aid  all  the  more  if  we  reflect  that  it 
was  nearly  a  century  ere  such  prophetic  voices  were 
again  heard. 


CHAPTER  II 


THE  CHANGED  ENVIRONMENT 

From  the  beginning  of  this  period  on,  the'Hebrews 
appear  to  have  had  little  trouble  with  the  Canaanites. 
They  may  still  in  many  regions  have  had  to  hew  their 
own  wood  and  draw  their  own  water  ;  but  they  were 
now,  especially  in  the  south,  fast  absorbing  the  old 
Canaanitish  stock.  The  Books  of  Samuel  which  have 
to  do  professedly  with  all  Israel,  though  they,  in  fact, 
deal  principally  with  David’s  own  clan,  mention  the 
Amorites  only  twice  and  the  Canaanites  but  once.  The 
Books  of  the  Kings  have  scarcely  more  to  say  of 
them.  It  is  evident  that  in  Solomon’s  day  the  proc¬ 
ess  of  absorption,  while  far  from  complete  in  the  low¬ 
lands,  and  particularly  in  the  north,  was  fast  going 
on.  The  Hebrews  could  now  begin  to  think  of  the 
land  as  theirs.  Centuries  of  occupancy  enabled  them 
to  regard  it  as  in  some  real  sense  their  fatherland, 
the  home  of  their  mythical  progenitors.  Though 
they  might  be  spoken  of  by  their  neighbours  as  “  Out- 
landers,”  or  “  Hebrews,”  their  grip  had  so  tightened 
that  they  could  speak  of  the  land  as  Yahweli’s.  If 
in  their  eyes  he  as  their  God  had  not  wholly  usurped 
Baal,  if  the  proprietorship  was  still  a  divided  proprie¬ 
torship,  the  thought  was  at  least  an  advance  upon  the 
older  thought  of  the  distant  Sinai  as  the  home  of 

ill 


112  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Yahweh.  For  that  matter,  all  along  there  had  been 
a  contradiction  in  their  thought  of  Yah  well’s  abiding- 
place,  for  to  most  of  them  the  Ark  was  Yaliweli’s 
seat.  It  seems  at  times  as  though  they  identified  it 
with  their  God,  so  that  the  loss  of  it  was  temporarily 
the  loss  of  him.1  It  is  probable  that  in  the  north  the 
problem  of  getting  the  better  of  the  Canaanites  and 
absorbing  them  had  to  be  faced  a  century  longer  than 
it  had  in  the  south.  Granting  this,  we  may  still  de¬ 
clare  that  the  environment  of  the  social  life  of  the 
people  as  a  whole  had  changed,  and  that  they  had 
come  into  closer  touch  with  the  world  without.2  The 
great  nations  were  for  a  considerable  time  to  leave 
them  singularly  alone,  perhaps  because,  on  the  whole, 
they  despised  them ; 3  but  when  the  propitious  mo¬ 
ment  came,  they  were  to  step  in  and  demand  tribute. 
Till  then  the  lesser  highways,  as  that  trodden  by 
Ehud  when  he  went  with  his  gift-bearers  to  Eglon 
of  Moab,  were  not  to  be  traversed  by  such  agents 
save  as  coming  from  some  near-lying  foreign  peo¬ 
ple,  they  should  bring  their  forced  gratuities  to  the 
Hebrews. 

Beginning  with  David  himself,  we  find  traces  of 
foreign  relations  and  alliances  through  marriage  or 
through  some  simple  form  of  covenant.  In  the 
harem  of  this  king  were  several  wives  of  foreign 


^Indeed,  every  massebah ,  or  pillar,  set  up  and  anointed  was  re¬ 
garded  as  Yahweh’ s  dwelling-place. — Gen.  xxviii.  22,  etc.;  Hast¬ 
ings’  Die.,  vol.  i.,  p.  75  f. 

*Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex.,  p.  114;  Wellhausen,  Encyc. 
Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  405  f. 

3  See,  however,  1  Kings  xiv,  25. 


THE  CHANGED  ENVIRONMENT 


113 


birtli,  as  there  were  also  concubines  from  Jebus  and 
other  peoples  than  his  own  Judahites.  Absalom  was 
a  son  of  Maacah,  the  daughter  of  Talmai.  It  was  to 
his  maternal  grandfather  he  fled  after  he  slew  Amnon. 
Bathslieba,  the  mother  of  Solomon,  had  for  her  first 
husband  a  Hittite,  a  foreigner  in  David’s  service. 
A  critical  study  of  the  text  leads  us  to  surmise  that 
the  reputed  number  of  Solomon’s  wives  and  concu¬ 
bines  may  be  materially  reduced;  but  that  he  con¬ 
tracted  several  foreign  matrimonial  alliances,  there 
seems  little  reason  for  doubting.  The  mother  of  his 
son  and  successor,  Behoboam,  was,  as  we  know,  an 
Ammonitess.  If  in  the  beginning  of  the  days  of  the 
monarchy,  in  what  was  after  all  its  day  of  small 
things,  this  could  be,  we  ought  to  be  prepared  to  read 
of  such  a  marriage  as  that  of  Aliab  to  Jezebel  at  a 
much  later  day. 

But  not  alone  in  these,  but  also  in  other  and  more 
notable  ways,  the  Hebrews  came  to  feel  themselves 
to  be  a  part  of  a  larger  world  than  their  own.  As 
their  nomadic  pursuits  broadened  into  other  forms 
of  industrial  life,  they  became  of  consequence  com¬ 
mercially  to  the  nations  about  them.  This  at  least 
is  clear  from  the  stories  of  the  relations  which  David 
and  Solomon  sustained  to  Hiram  of  Tyre,  that  be¬ 
tween  the  Phoenicians  and  the  Hebrews  of  the  time 
of  the  monarchy  there  was  considerable  commercial 
activity.  It  was  to  foreign  courts  refugees  fled. 
Hadad  of  Edom  went  to  Egypt  to  avoid  Solomon.1 
Thither  fled  Jeroboam,  who  had  been  at  the  head  of 
the  forced  labour  of  Solomon  in  the  north,  who  as  a 

1  1  Kings  xi.  17. 


114  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


capable,  energetic  man  was  destined  to  divide  the 
kingdom  with  his  son.1  Later  we  have  an  early 
attempt  at  extradition,  though  in  this  instance,  as  is 
often  the  case  to-day  under  similar  circumstances, 
the  man  was  in  hiding  at  home.2  Peoples  seem  to 
have  had  at  times  streets  of  their  own  in  foreign 
cities,  and  trade  tended  more  and  more  to  assume 
international  proportions. 

Small  neighbouring  peoples  fell  at  first  into  the 
lap  of  Judah  ;  but  after  the  first  century  Moab  and 
Ammon  seem  to  have  come  under  the  sway  of  the 
stronger  Northern  Kingdom.  Judah  had  quite  enough 
to  do  to  keep  the  Edomites  up  to  their  obligations  as 
a  tributary  people.  Syria  found  it  to  her  advantage 
at  times  to  cultivate  friendly  relations  with  both 
North  and  South  Israel ;  covenants  were  made  with 
them ;  at  other  times  she  devastated  with  fire  and 
sword  their  territory.  With  the  exception  of  the  days 
of  the  greatest  ruler  the  Northern  Kingdom  ever  had, 
Jeroboam  II.,  the  closing  century  of  the  life  of  that 
kingdom  was  unsettled  by  the  frequent  Syrian  in¬ 
vasions  ;  while  the  Southern  Kingdom,  besides  suffer¬ 
ing  at  the  hand,  of  Syria,  had  also,  after  the  fall  of  Sa¬ 
maria,  to  purchase  exemption  of  Assyria  by  a  tribute 
that  must  have  about  exhausted  the  financial  resources 
of  the  state.  Yet,  despite  all  this,  the  relations  sus¬ 
tained  to  other  peoples  must  for  the  most  part  have 
been  fairly  amicable.  And  the  influence  of  these 
different  peoples  upon  Israel,  though  largely  un¬ 
recognised  at  the  time,  and  still  more  difficult  to 

1  1  Kings  xi.  40. 

5  A  part  of  the  time  at  least.  —  1  Kings  xyiii  10;  cf.  XTii.  3. 


THE  CHANGED  ENVIRONMENT 


115 


measure  now,  must  have  been  considerable.  If  in 
the  earlier  time  they  had  not  been  isolated,  surely 
now  they  were  not,  situated  as  they  were  on  or  near 
the  great  caravan  routes  east  and  west,  north  and 
south,  and  within  reach  of  the  mighty  armies  which 
swept  up  and  down  the  maritime  plain  to  the  west 
of  them.  The  Hebrews  were  within  the  radius  of 
influence  of  Phoenicia,  Egypt,  Babylon,  and  Greece. 
Tradition  has  it  that  they  spoiled  the  Egyptians  ere 
they  came  forth  to  set  up  a  civic  life  of  their  own. 
The  student  of  their  life  from  the  days  of  David  on¬ 
ward  is  compelled  to  acknowledge  that  they  continued 
to  borrow,  and  that  the  whole  ancient  world  became 
their  creditors.1  This  conclusion  thus  forced  upon 
us,  coincides,  fortunately,  with  our  present  under¬ 
standing  of  national  indebtedness. 

It  does  not  devolve  upon  us  to  set  forth  here  the 
special  ways  in  which  this  influence  was  most  potent. 
Probably  in  the  realm  of  industry  including  the  arts, 
especially  literature,  it  was  no  more  powerful  during 
this  period  than  in  the  realm  of  religion ;  though  the 
Persian  influence  was  not  strongly  felt  until  after  the 
Captivity.  One  cannot  read,  even  in  a  cursory  way, 
the  J  narrative  as  it  is  found  in  the  Hexateucli  with¬ 
out  becoming  aware  of  this.  It  is  the  Babylonian 
that  here  by  his  cosmogony  and  in  other  ways  makes 
his  influence  felt.  Foreign  worship  was,  as  we  know, 
common  throughout  this  period.  The  worship  of 
Baal  and  Astarte  clung  with  peculiar  pertinacity  to 
the  north.  Whether  other  foreign  cults  rooted  them¬ 
selves  deeply  in  the  life  of  the  people  may  be  ques- 
1  Wellhausen,  Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  405  ff. 


116  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


tioned.  It  is  probable  that  the  star-gazing  of  the 
society  belles  of  Jerusalem,  a  Babylonian  importa¬ 
tion,  was,  like  similar  attempts  to  acclimate  foreign 
cults,  in  the  nature  of  a  fad,  as  was  charioteering  in 
the  capital  in  the  days  of  Absalom  and  Adonijah. 
While  not  attempting  to  estimate  the  amount  of 
foreign  influence,  we  may  safely  say  it  was  unques¬ 
tionably  large  ;  though  we  are  mainly  interested  in 
calling  attention  to  the  more  patent  fact  that  the  en¬ 
vironment  of  Israel  had  changed  as  they  had  passed 
out  of  the  days  of  their  old  vindicators,  when  life  was 
still  largely  nomadic  and  patriarchal,  into  the  time 
of  the  monarchy,  when  Israel  entered  upon  a  stage 
of  society  which,  with  its  many  large  proprietors  and 
its  overlords,  or  kings,  was  essentially  feudalistic.  To 
one  thoroughly  conversant  with  the  social  life  in  Eng¬ 
land  from  the  days  of  the  Saxon  Heptarchies  down 
to  the  time  of  King  John,  many  fascinating  parallels 
occur  as  he  enters  into  the  life  of  the  Hebrews  of  the 
monarchy.  Widely  separated  as  were  the  two  peoples 
in  point  of  time  they  were  yet  essentially  one  in  many 
of  the  characteristic  features  of  their  social  life. 

And  if  the  outward  environment  had  changed,  the 
inner,  or  local,  environment  had  also  changed.  With¬ 
out  anticipating  what  we  shall  have  to  say  in  our  next 
chapter  on  the  passing  of  the  clan  and  the  growth 
of  the  monarchy,  we  may  here  call  attention  to  the 
fact  that  this  internal  change  in  the  body  politic,  slow 
as  it  was  in  making  itself  felt,  was  nevertheless  great. 
We  had  occasion  in  Part  I.  to  note  that  the  so-called 
Judges  were,  at  the  most,  local  vindicators,  not  rulers, 
who  exercised  for  long  periods,  and  over  the  whole 


THE  CHANGED  ENVIRONMENT 


117 


people,  judicial  functions,  and  who  controlled  at  the 
same  time,  with  firm  hand,  their  domestic  affairs  and 
foreign  policy.  The  absurdity  of  the  supposition  of 
later  centuries  that  they  were  such,  is  now,  as  we 
earlier  contended,  apparent  enough.  The  Hebrews 
passed  out  of  the  days  of  their  vindicators  into  the 
time  of  the  monarchy,  and  in  doing  so  greatly  changed 
the  internal  framework  of  their  social  life ;  that  is, 
the  local  and  internal  environment  of  the  smaller  ag¬ 
gregations  altered  materially,  while  the  life  as  a  whole 
found  itself  very  differently  circumstanced.  In  the 
ruling  house  the  people  discovered  a  new  centre 
about  which,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  proportionate 
to  its  character  and  achievements,  thought,  interest, 
and  affection  could  crystallise.  Though  the  monarch 
might  be  weak,  the  influence  of  the  Court  would  make 
itself  widely,  and  often  disastrously,  felt ;  and  general¬ 
ly  quite  as  widely  if  the  ruler  was  weak.  By  one  of 
the  chroniclers,  to  whose  narrative  1  Samuel  ix.-x.  13 
belongs,  it  is  made  to  appear  that  both  Samuel  and 
Yahweh  are  desirous  that  Saul  shall  be  anointed  and 
raised  to  the  rank  of  vindicator ;  by  the  other,  to 
whom  the  widely  divergent  eighth  chapter  owes  its 
origin,  Yahweh  is  said  to  be  offended  and  Samuel  to 
be  extremely  displeased  with  the  people  for  desiring 
a  king  like  the  surrounding  nations.  Neither  chron¬ 
icler  is  wholly  wrong.  Monarchy,  in  such  a  stage  of 
society  as  that  into  which  they  were  passing,  has  its 
uses  as  it  has  also  its  disadvantages  and  its  perils. 
But  the  change  was  made,  though  in  the  making  of  it, 
Saul  but  prepared  the  way  for  another  better  fitted 
for  leadership.  The  change,  which  was  only  partial 


118  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


and  tentative  in  Saul,  came  about  more  surely,  yet 
slowly,  after  the  crowning  of  David  at  Hebron.  The 
student  of  the  life  of  the  time  has  to  reckon  with  it  in 
endeavouring  to  picture  to  himself  the  social  side  of 
the  people’s  life.  Henceforth  there  was  to  be  a  king 
somewhere  among  them  as  Hebrew  clans  or  tribes. 
The  monarchy  was  to  be  recognised,  supported,  and 
to  some  extent  deferred  to.  Life  was,  therefore,  to  be 
more  or  less  moulded  thereby.  Socially  and  indus¬ 
trially  it  was  to  make  itself  felt ;  in  just  what  ways  we 
are  not  now  prepared  to  say.  Only  a  close  study  of 
the  social  life  of  the  people  during  this  period  will 
render  this  apparent. 


CHAPTER  III 


THE  PASSING  OF  THE  CLAN 

The  life  of  tlie  Hebrews  prior  to  the  establishment 
of  the  monarchy  was,  as  we  have  seen,  largely  vested 
on  both  its  civil  and  its  social  side  in  the  clan,  the 
free  citizens  of  which  determined,  in  accordance  with 
ancient  customs,  matters  of  general  concern.  Under 
the  rule  of  kings  things  changed  and  the  clan  fell 
more  and  more  into  the  background  as  a  vital  factor 
in  the  social  life  of  the  people,  while  the  civic  affairs 
which  were  not  arranged  by  the  crown  were  left  prin¬ 
cipally  to  the  sheiks  or  free  citizens  of  the  various 
cities.1  That  this  change  was  gradual,  the  frag¬ 
mentary  chronicles  of  the  time  reveal  in  many  in¬ 
cidental  hints  and  allusions.  Not  only  were  minor 
matters,  as  the  securing  of  blood-revenge,  where  the 
immediate  relatives  for  any  reason  shrank  from  de¬ 
manding  it,  looked  after  by  sept  or  clan,  but  for  a 
considerable  period  more  important  matters  were 
still  in  the  hands  of  these  septs  and  clans.  Be¬ 
sides,  the  sheiks,  or  elders,  as  we  persist  in  calling 
them,  were  frequently  mentioned  as  being  consulted 
or  as  coming  to  the  front  and  taking  things  iuto  their 
hands  in  times  of  grave  concern.2  In  the  days  of  Eli 
the  matter  of  taking  the  Ark  to  battle  in  their  cam- 

1  Wellhausen,  Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  409. 

2  Kittel,  His.  of  Heb.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  299  f.  The  prominence  of  tlie 
sheiks  in  the  J  and  E  narratives  of  the  Exodus  should  be  noted. 

119 


120  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


paign  against  the  Philistines  had  been  decided  by 

them.  Long  afterward  Abner  communicated  with 
them  when  he  wanted  to  carry  North  Israel  over  to 
David.  To  the  sheiks  David  himself  often  deferred, 
as  at  times,  bidden  or  unbidden,  these  men  came  for¬ 
ward  to  council  him.  Absalom  allied  himself  with 
the  sheiks,  and  they  shared  with  him  the  responsi¬ 
bilities  which  he  had  assumed  in  taking  things  into 
his  own  hands.  David’s  appeal  to  the  sheiks  of 
Judah  when  he  sent  to  them,  after  the  overthrow  of 
Absalom,  to  ascertain  why  they  had  not  taken  ac¬ 
tion  in  the  matter  of  reinstating  him,  is  significant. 
The  freemen  of  Judah  were  still  able  to  come  together, 
if  they  so  desired,  in  clan  assembly  for  the  purpose 
of  general  action.  Similarly,  Solomon  had  to  do  with 
the  sheiks.  The  chroniclers  speak  of  frequent  con¬ 
ferences.  Here  the  men  consulted,  as  may  have  been 
very  frequently  the  case  in  his  father’s  day,  were 
probably  those  of  Jerusalem.  Geographical  location 

then,  as  has  so  often  been  the  case  in  other  lands 
during  later  centuries  where  the  representative  prin¬ 
ciple  was  partially  recognised,  largely  determined  the 
extent  and  character  of  such  influence ;  but  the  mere 
fact  that  it  had  a  place,  is  what  we  would  here  empha¬ 
sise.  Its  range  must  have  been  considerable.  Even 
such  a  self-reliant,  aggressive  man  as  Ahab,  backed 
as  he  was  by  one  of  the  most  energetic  women  of  his 
time,  is  said  to  have  conferred  with  his  city  freemen 
in  an  affair  that  seemed  to  all  of  special  concern.1 
That  he  never  again  deferred  to  them  is  utterly  im¬ 
probable. 

1 1  Kings  xxi.  8  ff. 


THE  PASSING  OF  THE  CLAN 


121 


All  this,  if  we  have  not  before  noted  it,  may  strike 
ns  as  strange,  accustomed  as  we  have  been  to  regard 
the  Hebrew  monarchy  as  absolute ;  but  that  this 
should  have  been  so  ought  not  to  surprise  us  if  we 
have  noted  the  fact  that  there  were  many  in  those 
times  who  as  large  proprietors  were  very  comfortably 
circumstanced.  We  come  frequently  upon  men  pos¬ 
sessed  of  the  means  of  Nabal,  the  Carmelite,  without 
his  well-known  churlishness  and  parsimoniousness. 
The  men  who  so  royally  received  and  supplied  David 
over  in  the  east  Jordan  region  when  he  fled  from 
Absalom,  Barzilli,  Sliobi,  and  Macliir,  were  men  who 
had  their  counterparts  in  a  large  class  on  the  west 
side,  as  also  on  their  own.1  Such  large  free  proprie¬ 
tors  are  everywhere  to  be  met  in  those  times.  Even 
Ziba,  a  feudal  tenant  or  dependent  of  the  House  of 
Saul,  could  generously  remember  David  as  he  was 
setting  out,  taking  to  him  as  he  did  a  hundred  loaves 
of  bread,  a  hundred  cakes  of  dried  figs  and  the  same 
of  raisins,  together  with  a  skin  of  wine  and  two  sad¬ 
dled  asses.2  This  man  appears  almost  invariably  in 
the  narratives  of  his  time  with  his  fifteen  sons  and 
his  twenty  slaves.  Shimei,  who  manifested  a  differ¬ 
ent  disposition  in  his  attitude  toward  his  royal  mas¬ 
ter  in  distress,  is  able  to  muster  and  take  with  him  a 
thousand  Benjaminites,  an  adroit  move  on  his  part, 
when  he  with  great  show  of  obsequiousness  goes 
down  to  the  J ordan  at  a  later  day  to  seek  restitution 
to  favour.3  He  disappears  from  sight  in  the  days  of 
Solomon,  after  having  given  offence  by  going  beyond 

!2  Sam.  xvii.  27  ff.  2  2  Sam.  xvi.  1  ff. 

3  2  Sam.  xix.  16  f. 


122  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  where  he  is  kept  in  ward,  in 
search  of  two  runaway  slaves.1  Naboth  was  a  man  of 
enough  consequence  to  venture  to  refuse  Ahab  his 
heart’s  desire ;  and  though  he  had  later  to  fall  by 
reason  of  the  perfidy  of  the  King  and  his  wife,  he  fell 
not  without  the  approval  of  the  very  class  of  freemen 
to  whom  he  himself  belonged.  Such  free  proprietors 
as  we  thus  come  upon  so  often  in  the  chronicles  of 
the  time  were  men  who  would  guard  most  sacredly 
old  customs,  and,  clinging  tenaciously  to  their  rights 
as  clansmen,  would  reluctantly  yield  to  the  royal 
prerogative. 

That  the  clans  gave  way  slowly,  while  the  mon¬ 
archy  as  slowly  grew  in  favour,  appears  in  other  ways 
than  those  already  mentioned.  The  difficulty  with 
which  David  and  Solomon  held  their  thrones  in  the 
face  of  different  aspirants  to  the  royal  dignity,  is  in 
evidence  on  the  point  under  consideration.  Several 
attempts  were  made  to  unseat  David.  The  war  in 
which  Abner  was  a  leading  spirit,  if  indeed  he  was 
not  wholly  responsible  for  the  movement,  Ishbaal 
being  weak  and  incompetent,  was  virtually  a  revolt 
against  the  expectations  and  pretensions  of  David. 
Had  Abner  been  supported  by  the  other  clans  as  he 
was  by  Benjamin,  the  only  clan  that  ever  manifested 
much  interest  in  the  House  of  Saul,  David  must 
have  gone  down  ingloriously.  Absalom  failed  more 
through  want  of  character  and  ordinary  shrewdness 
than  through  want  of  support  on  the  part  of  the 
people ;  while  poor  Sheba  was  backed  by  his  own 
clan  only. 


1  1  Kings  ii.  39  ff. 


THE  PASSING  OF  THE  CLAN 


123 


North  Israel  during  all  the  days  of  David  and  Sol¬ 
omon  was  waiting  for  its  man.  It  had  nurtured  in  its 
liberty-loving  towns  and  municipalities  loyal  free  cit¬ 
izens,  but  it  had  trained  no  one  man  for  the  task  of 
organisation  and  leadership.  In  David,  on  the  other 
hand,  Judah  had  found  one  who  in  the  school  of  ad¬ 
versity  had  received  the  needed  discipline.  But  if  the 
people  of  the  north  submitted  to  the  rule  of  Jeroboam 
and  his  successors,  they  certainly  did  not  reveal  any 
great  affection  for  royalty.  Their  traditional  love  of 
liberty  was  too  deep-seated  to  allow  any  royal  house 
to  hold  them  long  in  subjection. 

Solomon’s  reign  was  not  apparently  as  peaceful 
as  in  retrospect  it  seemed  to  priestly  narrators. 
Some  of  the  men  who  in  those  days  sat  under  their 
own  vine  and  fig-tree  probably  kept  their  weapons 
of  war  within  easy  reach.  We  may  not  follow  the 
Deuteronomist  to  his  conclusions  here,  but  we  may 
accept  his  admission  that  there  was  more  or  less  un¬ 
pleasantness  in  liis  reign  and  that  the  art  of  warfare 
was  not  forgotten  in  Israel. 

Evidence  of  another  kind  appears  in  the  character 
of  the  actual  functions  of  kings  and  in  their  position 
as  overlords  possessed  of  a  large  bodyguard  or  small 
standing  army.  They,  as  David’s  seasoned  soldiers, 
though  few  in  number,  on  more  than  one  occasion 
vanquished  the  raw  levies  opposed  to  them.  The 
pomp  and  glitter  of  royalty,  though  on  a  miniature 
scale,  made  itself  felt  upon  many.  Mothers  of  kings 
as  queens  regent  added  to  the  glory  of  the  throne, 
especially  if  they  were  of  distinguished  foreign  ex¬ 
traction.  The  King  was  not,  it  may  be,  always 


124  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


named  by  his  father  or  predecessor,  and  may  not 
always  have  been  proclaimed  or  acclaimed  king  by 
the  people,  though  they  might  not  fail  to  greet  him 
with  the  customary  salutation  :  “  Let  the  King  live.” 
Primogeniture  did  not  hold.  The  length  of  the 
Davidic  line  itself  reveals  the  fact  that  kings  usually 
chose  their  stronger  and  more  competent  sons  to  this 
office,  as  the  records  actually  reveal  that  they  did. 
But  that  the  King  when  chosen,  and  however  chosen, 
was  anointed  and  crowned  we  know,  and  that  he 
maintained  for  those  times  and  the  people  over  whom 
he  reigned  considerable  state,  we  also  know.  We 
trust  it  was  the  precious  stone  taken  from  the  crown 
that  had  been  lifted  from  the  head  of  Milcom,  the 
god  of  Ammon,  that,  put  in  David’s  crown,  was  worn 
by  him  rather  than  the  enormous  crown  itself,  which, 
according  to  the  chronicler,  was  so  heavy  as  to  crush 
any  but  a  giant,  and  such  even  as  to  add  to  a  giant’s 
traditional  self-conceit.  In  the  size  of  the  King’s 
royal  residences,  in  his  large  retinue  of  servants,  in 
his  great  harem  of  comely  women  brilliantly  clad, 
and  in  other  ways  he  appealed  to  his  people.  Large 
proprietors  might  vie  with  him  to  some  extent,  but 
they  were  probably  willing  that  he  should  lead,  and 
sometime,  it  may  be,  were  fearful  of  incurring  his 
jealousy.  Then,  too,  the  King  surrounded  himself 
with  civil  functionaries,  men  whose  duty  it  was  as  a 
sort  of  cabinet  or  council  to  assist  and  advise  in  the 
conduct  of  the  affairs  of  state.  There  was  the  chief 
of  the  army,  and  sometimes  the  head  of  the  body¬ 
guard  as  distinct  from  the  general-in-chief,  a  head 
of  the  forced  labour,  a  treasurer,  a  recorder  or  private 


THE  PASSING  OF  THE  CLAN 


125 


secretary,  and  a  scribe.  Chroniclers  and  men  of  re¬ 
puted  wisdom  adorned  the  Court  by  their  occasional 
presence,  if  they  were  not  in  constant  attendance ; 
wThile  princes  and  sons  of  rivals,  as  hostages,  sat  at 
the  royal  board. 

The  judicial  functions  of  the  King  are  not  to  be 
overlooked.  These  were  of  pre-eminent  importance. 
As  the  chief-justice  the  King  was  the  final  court  of 
appeal.  If  these  duties  added  greatly  to  the  burdens 
of  his  position,  they  also  served  to  magnify  him  in 
the  eyes  of  his  people,  and  made  it  possible  for  a 
king  of  judicial  temper  to  strongly  mould  the  social 
life  of  his  subjects.  The  most  serious  charge  that 
could  be  brought  against  David  as  he  advanced  in 
years  was  that  he  neglected  his  judicial  duties.  If 
the  King  failed  here,  there  was  none  who  could  step 
in  and  make  good  his  dereliction. 

This  subject  ought  not  to  be  dismissed  without 
reference  to  the  chroniclers,  who,  for  reasons  of  their 
own,  saw  fit  to  keep  thought  of  their  clans  before 
the  people.  Perhaps  we  have  here  evidence  of  a 
negative  sort  in  favour  of  the  growing  influence  of  the 
monarchy  both  north  and  south,  though  we  quite  as 
surely  find  evidence  that  the  clan  as  a  clan  had  come 
far  short  of  being  relegated  to  desuetude.  In  the  so- 
called  Blessing  of  Jacob  which  belongs  to  this  period, 
its  date  being  subsequent  to  the  time  of  Solomon, 
appear  distinct  tribal  demarcations  and  considerable 
practically  independent  tribal  life.1  Beuben,  the 
first-born,  the  tribe  that  may  at  one  time,  as  Dillmann 

1  Even  in  the  later  u  Blessing  of  Moses,”  this  is  still  true  of  the 
tribes. 


126  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


thinks,  have  had  the  hegemony,  is  spoken  of  as  pre¬ 
eminent,  though  at  the  same  time  recognised  as  un¬ 
stable  and  lawless.  It  is  rebuked  for  immoral  cus¬ 
toms  or  practices  which  the  other  tribes  could  not 
sanction.  Thus  we  see  that  though  this  tribe  in  the 
days  of  the  chronicler  showed  signs  of  disintegration, 
it  was  still  powerful.  Of  Judah,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  author  of  the  poem  speaks  in  such  terms  of  praise 
as  to  reveal  the  fact  that  the  Blessing  of  Jacob  is  a 
part  of  the  J  narrative  of  the  Hexateuch.  The  refer¬ 
ence  to  the  sceptre  and  the  ruler’s  staff  as  belonging 
to  Judah  and  to  “  the  obedience  of  the  people  ”  as  his, 
though  in  striking  contrast  with  the  words  concern¬ 
ing  fruitful  Joseph,  yet  reveal  that  the  latter  tribe  was 
independent  of  the  former.  With  fewer  strokes  the 
other  tribes  are  pictured  for  us  in  such  a  way  as  to 
leave  the  impression  that  when  the  writer  sketched 
them  they  were  far  from  having  surrendered  all  their 
rights  and  privileges  as  separate  clans. 

A  somewhat  similar  impression  is  to  be  reached 
from  reading  critically  the  patriarchal  narratives  as 
writings  which  have  largely  to  do  with  peoples  with¬ 
out,  and  clans  among  the  Hebrews,  though  here,  as 
we  might  expect,  while  other  tribes  are  frequently 
spoken  of,  Judah  and  Joseph  stand  out  most  promi¬ 
nently.  The  distance  of  the  clans  which  were  lo¬ 
cated  beyond  Esdraelon  would  help  to  exclude  them 
from  the  thought  of  chroniclers  of  Ephraim  and 
Judah  ;  but  this  would  also  be  favourable  to  their  re¬ 
tention  of  most  of  their  clan  traditions  and  customs. 
These  clans  might  render  some  sort  of  homage  to  the 
great  tribe  of  Joseph  ;  but  the  wholesale  surrender  of 


THE  PASSING  OF  THE  CLAN 


127 


clan  rights  would  not  be  made — far  from  it.  Probably 
the  fact  that  the  reigning  houses  subsisted  principally 
upon  forays  upon  alien  peoples  would  keep  down 
considerably  the  demands  made  upon  such  clans  save 
those  for  military  service,  and  here  there  was  always 
the  expectation  of  rich  spoil  to  lure  them  into  doing 
the  bidding  of  royalty.  Still,  the  roving  nomadic  life 
was  one  thing,  and  the  settled  life  another,  especially 
as  these  clans  as  settled  under  the  monarchy  no  longer 
took  the  initiative  in  war,  and  were  forced  to  leave 
foreign  affairs  generally  to  their  kings.  The  central 
power  determined  for  them  their  foreign  policies  and 
left  them  at  most  little  more  than  their  own  local 
affairs  to  manage.  The  comparative  infrequency  with 
which  other  tribes  than  those  of  Judah  and  Joseph 
are  mentioned  in  the  literature  of  the  period  does 
not  argue  the  utter  breakdown  of  their  clan  life,  as  the 
fact  that  northern  clans  are  spoken  of  even  by  the 
northern  chroniclers  as  “  Israel  ”  as  a  rule  after  the 
establishment  of  a  kingly  seat  in  the  north  does  not. 
Yet  we  must  admit  that  the  clans  as  real  centres  of 
the  larger  life  of  the  people  faded  with  the  centuries 
into  insignificance,  while  the  reigning  houses  became 
more  powerful.  That  the  prophets  of  the  eighth  cen¬ 
tury  knew  little  of  clan  life  seems  evident.  They 
have  to  do  with  peoples,  with  nations.  A  man’s 
genealogy  was  still  in  his  tribe  ;  his  actual  life  was  in 
Israel  or  in  Judah. 


-> 


CHAPTEE  IV 

* 

THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  HOME 

We  have  to  account  for  the  growing  favour  with 
which  the  monogamous  family  was  regarded  during 
this  period.1  A  plurality  of  wives  had  been  the  rule 
among  the  Hebrews  as  nomads.  Even  during  the 
age  of  the  Yindicators,  as  we  have  seen,  men  who 
were  so  circumstanced  as  to  be  able  to  maintain  more 
than  a  single  wife  were  polygamists.  Yet  in  process 
of  time,  during  the  period  of  the  monarchy,  if  not 
earlier,  monogamy  came  quite  markedly  into  favour,  if 
not  with  the  ruling  classes,  at  least  among  many  of 
the  people  and  among  some  who  exerted  a  potent  in¬ 
fluence.  The  J  and  E  narratives  of  the  Hexateuch, 
which  we  here  need  to  remind  ourselves  were  not  the 
work  of  individuals  but  of  schools  or  centres  of 
thought,  in  idealising  their  past,  do  so  in  such  a  way 
as  to  leave  upon  their  readers  the  impression  that 
monogamous  marriages  were  to  be  preferred.  Men 
like  Adam,  Noah,  Isaac,  and  Joseph  appear  as  the  hus¬ 
bands  of  single  partners.  A  beautiful  idyl  is  that  of 
the  courtship  of  Eebekah,  out  of  which  narrative  much 
of  the  beauty  would  have  gone  had  the  writer  spoken 
in  the  same  breath  near  the  close  of  Isaac  as  taking 

1  Kittel,  His.  of  the  Hebrews ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  298;  Wellhausen, 
Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  408. 


128 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  HOME 


129 


to  himself  other  wives  of  the  daughters  of  the  land. 
It  is  true  that  certain  of  the  patriarchs,  as  Abraham 
and  Jacob,  are  spoken  of  naturally  as  possessed  of 
more  than  one  wife  as  well  as  concubines ;  but  Abra¬ 
ham  marries  Keturah  after  Sarah’s  death,  and  Jacob 
has  Leah  deceitfully  given  him  to  wife,  a  woman  he 
does  not  want,  so  that  nothing  is  left  to  him  but  to 
marry  as  quickly  as  he  may  Rachel,  the  woman  whom 
he  ardently  loves.  Besides,  we  are  not  to  overlook 
the  fact  that  the  writers  of  these  narratives  do  bring 
out  most  unpleasantly  the  strifes  and  jealousies  with 
which  the  harems  of  these  patriarchs  were  rife.  The 
general  impression  left  upon  the  mind  of  the  reader, 
and  probably  designedly  so  left,  was  in  favour  of 
monogamy. 

It  must  in  those  days  have  become  very  evident  to 
thoughtful  minds  that  polygamy  was  less  suited  to 
a  settled  than  a  nomadic  life.  As  nomads  there  had 
not  only  been  an  excuse  but  even  evident  necessity 
for  it ;  as  city  dwellers  they  found  for  it  less  occa¬ 
sion.  A  single  woman  might  now  support  herself  by 
honest  industry  without  becoming  a  part  of  the  harem 
of  some  free  citizen.  Nevertheless,  polygamy  was 
slow  in  yielding,  and  could  have  yielded  but  partially 
to  monogamy  during  this  period.  Elkanah  appears 
as  the  husband  of  two  wives,  though  the  stories 
which  were  circulated  concerning  his  family  revealed 
the  unhappy  state  of  things  that  existed  all  too  often 
in  the  homes  of  those  times  where  there  was  a  plural¬ 
ity  of  wives.  Rulers  like  David  and  Solomon  set 
for  their  people  an  example  in  this  direction  which, 
taken  with  its  sequels  of  jealousy,  lust,  and  murder, 


130  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


must  have  led  many  to  think  seriously,  though  per¬ 
haps  to  little  purpose.  When  we  come  into  the  days 
of  the  literary  prophets  we  have  no  longer  doubt  as 
to  the  exaltation  of  monogamy  as  an  ideal,  though  we 
are  loath  to  believe  it  was  widely  practised  even  then, 
save  where  economic  reasons  necessitated  it.  It  was 
in  accordance  with  primitive  ideas  that  the  Book  of 
the  Covenant  should  guard  the  rights  of  concubines 
who  might  as  bondwomen  be  purchased,  only  to  be 
put  away  later  by  their  husbands.  Such  a  woman 
could  not  be  sold  to  a  strange  people  ;  opportunity 
was  to  be  given  to  those  who  had  sold  her  to  redeem 
her.  Marriage  was  still  largely  a  matter  of  barter. 
The  man  wedding  a  virgin  must  not  only  remember 
the  bride  with  some  gift  that  would  gratify  her,  but 
he  must  also  see  that  the  father  or  eldest  brother,  if 
the  father  was  not  living,  be  generously  remembered. 
Leah  and  Rachel,  according  to  story,  had  indignantly 
reminded  their  father  that  he  had  sold  them,  yet  the 
servant  of  Abraham  had  given  to  the  brother  and 
mother  of  Rebekah  precious  things  before  he  had 
brought  her  forth  from  Aram.  Probably  concubines, 
who  were  usually  female  slaves  bought  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  serving  in  the  home,  or  captives  of  war,  and 
who  were  made  to  rear  children  to  their  masters,  took 
very  frequently  the  place  of  other  wives  than  a  first. 
Common  as  slavery  was,  and  much  as  women  were 
used  for  work  long  since  thought  to  belong  to  men, 
the  number  of  homes  without  concubines,  save  among 
the  poor,  must  have  been  few.  Throughout  the 
period  they  are  often  mentioned ;  yet  there  were 
female  slaves  who  had  husbands  of  their  own,  as  the 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  HOME 


131 


Book  of  the  Covenant  reveals,  but  these  were  slaves 
of  one  and  the  same  master. 

Old  marriage  customs  survived.  The  husband  still 
brought  his  bride  to  his  own  or  to  his  father’s  house, 
where  a  feast  was  prepared  for  his  male  friends. 
Ordinarily  a  week  was  given  over  to  the  occasion, 
during  which  there  were  gross  excesses  in  eating  and 
drinking.  The  tent  of  the  bridegroom  was  pitched 
upon  the  roof,  a  custom  which,  as  Dr.  H.  P.  Smith 
remarks,  survives  to  this  day  in  the  bridal  canopy 
of  Jewish  weddings.  The  custom  of  requiring  the 
brother  to  marry  the  widow  of  the  deceased  also  ap¬ 
pears.  Undoubtedly  it  was  of  extreme  antiquity.  Sa- 
diqa  marriages  were  not  unknown,  though  the  reason 
for  them  was  not  as  conspicuous  as  in  the  earlier 
time.  Harlots  had  ceased  to  be  regarded  as  formerly 
they  had  been.  Though  not  yet  brought  under  the 
ban  of  tribal  statute,  the  changes  wrought  in  their 
social  status  left  them  where  they  were  regarded 
with  increasing  disfavour.1  Wives  or  daughters  who 
played  the  harlot  might  be  burnt.2  The  great  in¬ 
crease  of  “  devoted  women  ”  at  the  numerous  sanctu¬ 
aries,  which  became  in  time  sinks  of  iniquity  and  vice, 
had  much  to  do  with  the  decrease  of  harlots  as  in¬ 
dividuals  plying  a  trade  of  their  own.  Besides,  if 
they  were,  as  we  have  surmised,  a  relic  of  the  old 
matriarchate,  men  would,  with  the  progress  of  the 
centuries,  lose  sight  of  the  fact  and  so  come  to  re¬ 
gard  them  with  less  favour.3 

1  The  Book  of  the  Covenant  in  time  outlawed  them. 

2  Genesis  xxxviii. ;  Dillmann,  Genesis ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  343. 

3  See  Appendix  II. 


132  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


Authority  in  the  home  throughout  this  period  be¬ 
longed  to  the  husband,  or,  if  he  were  dead,  to  the 
eldest  son.  Wives  and  children  were  under  his  con¬ 
trol  to  a  greater  extent  than  when  the  clan  was  more 
vigilant  and  more  inclined  to  insist  upon  its  ancient 
rights.  Even  mature  sons  were  not  exempt  from 
paternal  control.  Saul  goes  forth  obediently  to  look 
for  his  father’s  asses,  and  cannot  forget  that  he  is 
under  authority  while  away ;  and  the  headstrong  Ab¬ 
salom,  lenient  as  David  was,  dares  not  show  himself 
at  Court  after  his  return  from  exile  until  he  receives 
royal  permission.  Husbands  were  not  wanting  who 
deferred  to  their  wives  or  gave  them  considerable 
freedom ;  but  no  such  position  was  accorded  wives 
as  Professor  Sayce  has  shown  was  given  their  waves 
by  the  Babylonians.1  It  is  improbable  that  the 
Hebrew  wife  ever  held  property  of  her  own  or  that 
she  engaged  in  business  on  her  own  account. 

Children  were  desired,  and  when  born,  were 
prized.2  The  patriarchal  and  other  stories  of  the 
time  reveal  this  ;  and  the  names  given  even  to  female 
babes,  as  “  Grace  ”  and  “  Pearl,”  suggest  the  delight 
and  high  hopes  of  the  parents.  In  times  of  sickness 
in  the  home  the  father  could  forget  his  business 
or  the  affairs  of  state  and  show  a  tender  solicitude. 
Ordinarily,  where  circumstances  allowed  of  it,  nurses 
were  employed.  Games  were  played  by  the  children, 
and  pet  animals  were  common.  The  love  of  the 
husband  and  father  was  not  unconfessed.  Chroni¬ 
clers  speak  freely  of  it.  Even  the  fact  that  a  man 

1  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  p.  13  ff.  (in  The  Semitic  Series). 

2  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  i.,  p.  381  f. 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  HOME 


133 


was  seen  sporting  with  his  wife  is  not  hidden.  The 
kiss  was  bestowed  by  the  father  npon  sons  as  well  as 
upon  daughters,  and  courteous  forms  of  speech  were 
employed  that  probably  made  it  easier  for  adult 
children  to  obey  the  behests  of  parents.  Formal  dis¬ 
position  of  property  was  made  at  the  close  of  life, 
though  the  first-born  was  by  ancient  custom  expect¬ 
ed  to  enter  upon  the  inheritance  of  the  bulk  of  the 
father’s  estate,  as  he  was  also  expected  to  assume  the 
cares  and  responsibilities  of  the  household.  The 
nature  of  the  Hebrew  home  was  such  as  to  account 
very  largely  for  the  superior  character  of  the  best 
men  of  the  time,  who,  on  any  other  supposition  than 
that  they  were  moulded  very  largely  by  home  influ¬ 
ence,  would  present  to  us  an  unsolvable  enigma. 

The  home  in  which  the  family  lived  was  usually  the 
home  also  of  the  domestic  animals,  built  where  cir¬ 
cumstances  permitted,  about  a  court,  and  having  its 
separate  chambers  or  apartments  opening  thereon, 
with  a  chamber  or  chambers  upon  the  roof.1  The 
well-to-do  kept  a  porter  or  door-keeper  at  the  single 
entrance.  Such  a  porter  might  serve  in  other  and 
more  menial  ways,  as  in  the  somewhat  straitened 
establishment  maintained  by  Ishbaal,  who  disputed 
for  several  years  with  David  his  father’s  kingly  crown. 
In  this  instance  the  poor  woman  who  had  charge  of 
the  door  had  also  to  clean  wheat,  and,  becoming  weary 
over  her  many  duties,  had  fallen  asleep,  thus  giving 
the  assassins  the  chance  to  slip  in  unnoticed.2  The 
couches  or  beds,  ordinarily  little  more  than  a  blanket 
used  upon  a  slightly  raised  platform,  with  which  the 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary,  vol.  ii.,  p.  431  ff.  5  2  Sam.  iv.  4  ff. 


134  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


chambers  were  provided,  were  used  by  day  as  well  as 
by  night.  The  siesta  was  universal.  It  was  neces¬ 
sitated  by  the  heat  of  midday,  which  much  of  the  time 
was  severe.  The  evening  meal  was  the  principal 
meal  of  the  day ;  at  this  guests  frequently  appeared. 
Special  honour  could  be  shown  friends  by  sending 
them  portions  from  the  table.  The  guest  if  he  re¬ 
mained  overnight  was  still,  in  accordance  with  ancient 
custom,  called  early  in  the  morning  and  sped  on  his 
way.  It  was  a  kindness  to  do  this  in  a  land  where 
the  wayfarer  must  do  his  journeying  ere  the  heat  of 
the  day.  As  families  of  wealth  increased  in  Jeru¬ 
salem,  and  more  especially  in  Samaria  in  the  days  of 
Jeroboam  II.,  habits  of  luxury  were  formed  and  un- 
blushingly  indulged.  The  winter  house  in  the  city 
had  its  counterpart  in  the  summer  cottage  among 
the  hills,  in  both  of  which  a  style  of  living  was 
adopted  that  crossed  the  austere  principles  of  other 
prophets  than  Amos,  the  Herd  of  Tekoah,  who  was 
accustomed  to  the  simplest  country  fare.  Cedar  and 
ivory  were  freely  used  in  the  construction  of  such 
houses ;  and  in  the  appointments  of  them,  in  the 
hangings,  the  rugs,  the  chairs,  the  couches,  etc.,  a  like 
degree  of  elegance  was  secured.  Utensils  of  bronze, 
silver,  and  gold  abounded.  Wives  joined  their  hus¬ 
bands  and  guests  in  their  drinking-bouts  and  the 
coarse  converse  which  formed  an  accompaniment  of 
the  feast.  The  pouring  out  of  wine  to  Baal  and  As- 
tarte,  or  even  to  Yah  well  himself,  disguised  not  the 
shamelessness  of  such  scenes.  This  was  the  worst 
fruitage  of  the  home,  and  this  darker  picture  needs 
to  be  placed  alongside  the  brighter. 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  HOME 


135 


As  clan  customs  tended  to  pass  away,  the  family 
gained  in  importance  as  a  social  factor  in  the  life  of 
the  people.  Becoming  purer  and  more  self-sufficing, 
the  homes  did  much  to  keep  the  people  from  disin¬ 
tegration.  Only  on  the  supposition  that  many  of  these 
homes  were  the  nurseries  of  pure  sentiments  and 
lofty  ambitions,  can  we  account  for  the  fact  that  the 
Hebrews  did  not  utterly  succumb  to  the  immoral  prac¬ 
tices  and  tendencies  of  the  time.  There  may  have 
been  little  moral  purity  at  the  high  places  ;  all  the 
more  reason  have  we  for  believing  that  the  home  life 
was  in  innumerable  instances  for  the  time  singularly 
strong  and  pure.  Like  many  of  the  Greek  homes  of 
those  times  the  Hebrew  homes  encouraged  industry 
and  thrift  and  fostered  purity ;  and  they  did  so  the 
more  surely  because  in  them  the  wife  and  mother  was 
loved  and  honoured.  The  brave  way  in  which  Hosea 
struggled  to  make  an  ideal  home  out  of  the  unpromis¬ 
ing  material  which  he  put  into  it,  gives  us  a  glimpse 
by  way  of  contrast  of  what  a  home  must  in  those 
times  have  been  where  both  husband  and  wife  were 
sincerely  striving  to  live  up  to  the  light  vouchsafed 
them.  Isaiah’s  home  must  have  been  of  this  char¬ 
acter.  May  not  thousands  of  the  humblest  of  the 
Hebrew  homes  throughout  these  four  centuries  have 
approximated  this  ideal  ? 


CHAPTER  V 


VILLAGE  AND  CITY  LIFE 

Solitary  farmsteads  were  not  to  be  found  among 
the  Hebrews.  Like  other  peoples  of  the  East,  they 
lived  in  towns,  in  clans,  septs  and  families,  partly 
because  such  life  was  more  convenient  and  more 
social  as  well  as  safer,  and  partly  because  it  grew 
naturally  out  of  their  nomadic  life.  Among  nomads 
the  individual  never  thinks  to  set  up  for  himself 
independently,  but  prefers,  as  he  must,  for  such 
things  are  settled  for  him,  to  lose  himself  in  his 
family,  his  sept,  and  his  clan.  Hebrew  life  in  Ca¬ 
naan  was,  therefore,  village  and  city  life.1  The  neces¬ 
sity  of  studying  the  people  from  this  point  of  view 
grows  out  of  the  nature  of  this  life  and  out  of  the 
fact  that  these  two  types  of  life  were  essentially  dis¬ 
tinct,  and  that  both  had  much  to  do  in  determining 
the  character  of  the  people. 

With  villages  may  be  included,  as  they  probably 
were  in  the  thought  of  the  Hebrews,  the  smaller  un¬ 
walled  towns,  a  few  of  which  may  have  attained  con¬ 
siderable  size ;  while  with  cities  we  must  include  the 
small  walled  towns.  The  necessities  of  the  times 
rendered  walls  the  only  means  of  defence  apart  from 
armed  resistance  where  an  enemy  came  upon  a  people. 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  i.,  p.  445  ;  vol.  ii.,  p.  3  f. 

136 


VILLAGE  AND  CITY  LIFE 


137 


They  were  imperatively  necessary.  But  the  circum¬ 
stances  of  the  smaller  communities  were  usually  such 
as  to  forbid  their  rearing  walls  that  would  afford  any 
real  defence  in  case  of  war.  From  wild  beasts  and 
from  petty  enemies,  as,  for  example,  thievish  neigh¬ 
bours,  their  homes,  constructed  usually  of  stone, 
furnished  undoubtedly  considerable  protection.  Sit¬ 
uated  then  as  they  were,  it  devolved  upon  the  in¬ 
habitants  of  the  villages  to  be  watchful  so  that  if  the 
land  was  invaded  by  a  foreign  foe  they  might  escape 
to  the  nearest  walled  city,  to  the  people  of  whom  they 
were  closely  allied,  usually  as  fellow-clansmen.  The 
keenly  apprehensive  character  of  these  village  com¬ 
munities  frequently  manifested  itself.  Beal  danger 
was  not  necessary  to  produce  such  a  state  of  feeling ; 
a  mere  rumour  was  enough,  so  insecure  were  they.  In 
the  days  of  Deborah  these  villages  were  deserted  by 
their  inhabitants,  such  was  the  activity  and  hostility 
of  the  northern  Canaanites,  who  later,  under  Sisera, 
tried  to  bring  the  Hebrew  clans  into  subjection  in  a 
campaign  in  which  they  went  down  ingloriously.  In 
times  of  warfare,  despite  the  precautions  ordinarily 
taken  by  them,  the  people  residing  in  these  villages 
sometimes  suffered  severely,  while  those  of  the  neigh¬ 
bouring  city  might  escape.  The  enemy  might  come 
upon  them  suddenly  and  unexpectedly.  They  and 
their  belongings  might  be  taken  possession  of,  and, 
the  adult  males  and  all  sick  and  otherwise  infirm  or 
useless  members  being  slain,  they  might  be  carried 
into  captivity,  the  only  redeeming  feature  of  which 
might  be  that  the  enemy  would  very  likely  be  a  people 
somewhat  akin  to  their  own  in  race  and  manner  of 


138  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


life.  The  extent  to  which  life  was  thus  in  those  times 
unsettled,  ought  not  to  be  overlooked  by  the  student 
of  it. 

The  names  for  such  local  communities  reveal  little 
as  to  their  peculiar  character ;  though  some  things, 
with  such  clews  as  we  have,  may  very  reasonably  be 
surmised.  Of  the  several  names  employed  the  most 
common  is  bath  (m),  i.e.,  daughter,  daughter  of  a  city. 
This  suggests  something  as  to  the  origin  of  these  vil¬ 
lages,  which,  as  already  stated,  might  be  occupied  by 
members  of  the  same  clan  as  lived  in  the  adjoining 
city.  The  relation  might,  however,  be  one  of  mere 
dependence.  The  village  might  be  occupied  by  a 
conquered  people  or  one  that  being  weak  and  de¬ 
fenceless  had  been  covenanted  with.  In  an  old  pas¬ 
sage  in  the  Book  of  Joshua  we  find  mention  of  the 
line  of  Canaanite  cities  that  separated  the  tribe  of 
Joseph  from  the  northern  clans.  These,  as  Megiddo 
and  Betli-shean,  are  named  with  their  daughters  or 
dependencies.  Presumably  most,  if  not  all,  of  these 
daughters  were  unwalled  villages.  It  is  what  we 
might  expect.  This  way  of  referring  to  the  smaller 
places  appears  in  the  later  literature.  Another  word 
appears  to  have  the  thought  of  being  spread  out,  or 
of  openness.  This  reveals  the  unwalled  character  of 
such  villages,  and  so  has  no  special  interest  for  us. 
Other  terms  appear  but  infrequently. 

That  the  people  of  these  communities  were  usually 
individual  families  or  septs  is  evident ;  that  they 
were  also  those  engaged  chiefly  in  pastoral  pursuits 
or  agriculture  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  ;  though 
that  there  were  such  communities  devoted  largely  to 


VILLAGE  AND  CITY  LIFE 


139 


mining  or  some  particular  line  of  manufacture  we 
cannot  doubt,  little  as  we  know  about  such  pursuits 
in  localities  which  were  specially  adapted  to  them. 
Villages  located  in  the  little  valleys  among  the  hills 
where  the  grazing  was  good  or  the  arable  land  fertile, 
may  in  many  instances  have  been  at  considerable  dis¬ 
tance  from  cities  of  any  size,  but  they  could  hardly 
have  been  far  removed  from  each  other.  Regions 
there  were  where  such  communities  were  numerous, 
as  in  parts  of  the  Shephelah.  Moresheth,  which  once 
was  a  dependency  of  Gath,  the  home  of  the  prophet 
Micah,  was  in  the  Shephelah  in  a  region  of  this  sort, 
where  “there  are  none  of  the  conditions  or  of  the 
occasions  of  a  large  town.”  1  Here  there  are,  as  G.  A. 
Smith  has  shown,  irregular  chalk  hills  separated  by 
broad  glens,  in  which  the  soil  is  rich,  with  room  for 
cornfields  on  either  side  of  the  perennial  streams. 

♦The  ruins  of  the  region,  as  well  as  its  character,  attest 
to  the  fact  that  it  was  once  dotted  with  these  thrifty, 
enterprising  communities. 

But  whether  these  villages  were  near  each  other 
or  remotely  separated,  life  in  them  was  essentially 
country  life.  There  was  fellowship  of  man  with  man  ; 
but  the  country  was  at  the  door  of  all.  They  were 
surrounded  by  the  sights  and  sounds  of  the  country. 
The  piping  of  the  shepherds  who  closely  watched 
their  flocks  on  the  near  hill-sides,  their  calls  across 
wadies  to  each  other,  and  all  the  sounds  of  pastoral 
life  could  be  plainly  heard.  The  ploughman  and  the 
sower  could  be  seen.  In  time  of  harvest  all  had  but 
to  step  without  into  the  adjacent  fields  and  they  could 
1  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Twelve  Prophets ,  vol.  i.,  p.  377. 


140  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


bear  their  part ;  so,  too,  in  time  of  vintage  or  when 
the  olives  must  be  gathered  and  pressed.  In  many  of 
these  small  villages  one  common  threshing-floor  might 
suffice  for  the  entire  community,  as  might  also  one 
wine-press.  Here,  though  families  might  have  their 
individual  fields  for  the  season  at  least,  as  they  surely 
would  have  their  individual  homes  and  granaries, 
there  was  something  akin  to  a  community  of  interests 
and  a  division  of  labour  in  the  very  fact  that  common 
utilities  might  serve  one  and  the  same  community. 
But  if  the  sights  and  sounds  of  country  labour  vrere 
thus  near  to  all  and  exerted  a  wholesome  influence, 
which  appears  at  its  best  in  men  like  Amos  and 
Micah,  the  more  potent  influences  of  the  country 
were  also  near.  The  pastures  and  cultivated  fields, 
the  sight  of  which  was  so  satisfying  to  such  a  people, 
though  they  may  not  have  had  that  keen  sensitiveness 
to  natural  beauty  which  the  modern  man  thinks  he 
has,  the  lowing  of  cattle,  the  bleating  of  sheep,  the 
hum  of  the  bees,  and  the  songs  of  the  birds,  and  all 
the  fascinating  allurements  of  the  country  environ¬ 
ment,  were  then  the  lot  of  those  who  lived  in  these 
villages.  Even  less  welcome  sounds,  as  the  roar  of  a 
lion,  might  occasionally  be  heard,  though  these  were 
heard  more  frequently  in  lonelier  regions.  In  such 
villages  strong,  healthful,  independent  men  were 
bred.  A  large  part  of  the  population  both  north 
and  south  was  apparently  so  reared.  Many  of  these 
people  may  have  had  little  of  the  culture  of  their  city 
kindred  ;  yet  for  this  very  reason  they  may  have  been 
purer  and  sturdier  morally.  Only  on  the  supposition 
that  the  larger  towns  and  the  cities,  which  by  reason 


VILLAGE  AND  CITY  LIFE 


141 


of  the  nature  of  their  sanctuaries  and  other  influences 
were  to  a  large  extent  pervaded  by  vice  and  disease, 
were  renewed  from  time  to  time,  as  our  cities  still 
are,  by  the  inflowing  of  the  more  healthy  tides  of  life 
from  the  country,  can  we  account  for  the  fact  that  the 
collapse  of  the  Hebrew  states  did  not  come  sooner. 

The. walled  towns  and  cities  of  the  Hebrews  were 
usually  located  upon  small  hills.  A  wady  on  one  or 
more  of  the  sides  of  the  city  was,  therefore,  a  char¬ 
acteristic  feature,  and  served  for  purposes  of  drain¬ 
age,  as  it  did  also  as  a  lurking-place  for  an  enemy. 
While  such  locations  would  be  favourable  to  health, 
it  was  not  this,  but  the  defensive  nature  of  such  sites, 
which  led  to  their  being  selected.  The  sites  of  most 
of  their  larger  cities  were  not,  however,  of  their  own 
choosing.  Long  before  their  day  the  Canaanites  had 
built  these,  only  to  pass  them,  with  the  lapse  of  time, 
over  to  the  Hebrews.  The  selection  of  the  particular 
hill  upon  which  a  city  should  be  built  had  been  de¬ 
termined  in  part  by  the  old  roads  of  the  land,  which 
ran  from  north  to  south  and  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
and  the  Jordan  to  the  Mediterranean  sea-board. 
Whether  the  immediate  region  of  the  site  of  a  city 
was  fertile  had  been  an  altogether  secondary  consid¬ 
eration,  though  a  site  that  was  otherwise  favourable 
was  considered  fortunate  if  there  was  rich  pasturage 
and  fertile  fields  which  were  not  far  away,  for  means 
of  transportation  in  those  times  were  inefficient. 
Jerusalem  had  more  to  recommend  it  in  the  way  of 
its  inaccessibility  and  its  practically  impregnable 
character  ;  while  Samaria  had  a  more  fertile  region 
at  its  very  door  to  which  it  could  confidentially  look 


142  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


for  sustenance.  Judea  never  was  densely  populated, 
and  Jerusalem  never  was  a  great  city  in  point  of 
numbers.  The  Northern  Kingdom,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  capable  of  sustaining  a  large  population, 
as  we  know  it  did  in  the  time  of  Christ,  and  it  prob¬ 
ably  had  at  the  time  under  consideration  a  number 
of  cities  of  considerable  size. 

The  Hebrew  cities  were  surrounded  by  walls, 
which  for  the  time  served  fairly  well  their  purposes. 
Assyria  in  her  best  days  found  some  of  these  cities 
difficult  to  reduce.  The  defensive  value  of  the  walls 
was  enhanced  by  towers  in  which,  as  well  as  upon 
the  walls  in  time  of  war,  men  might  be  placed.  Care¬ 
ful  attention  was  necessarily  given  to  the  care  and 
the  guarding  of  the  gates,  of  which  the  smaller  cities 
had  but  one,  while  the  larger  cities  had  several,  each 
of  which,  because  it  served  in  the  main  a  distinctive 
purpose,  had  its  appropriate  name.  In  some  way 
the  military  force  which  in  time  of  war  defended  a 
city  was  organised,  for  a  sudden  alarm  was  enough 
to  lead  to  a  careful  and  systematic  manning  of  the 
walls.  In  the  tower  over  the  principal  or  only  gate 
was  a  chamber  from  the  window  of  which  a  watch¬ 
man  could  easily  espy  a  coming  runner  or  the  ap¬ 
proach  of  an  enemy.  The  houses  of  these  cities  came 
close  up  to  the  narrow  streets,  though  they  usually 
had  their  interior  court  open  to  the  sky.  The  life  of 
the  family  would,  therefore,  have  been  tolerably  quiet, 
though  lived  in  the  city,  had  it  not  been  for  the  flat 
roofs  upon  which  the  people  were  often  to  be  found. 
Though  not  as  common  a  feature  of  the  social  life  of 
the  people  as  the  courts  of  their  houses,  the  roofs 


VILLAGE  AND  CITY  LIFE 


143 


were  largely  used,  and  their  use  contributed  much  in 
the  way  of  counteracting  any  tendencies  to  isolation 
which  other  features  of  their  homes  encouraged. 
The  market-place  within  but  near  the  gate,  and  a 
single  broad  way  or  street,  served  many  mercantile 
and  social  purposes ;  but  the  great  gathering-place 
was  outside  the  principal  or  only  gate.1 

To  the  city  gate  men  came  bearing  all  sorts  of  in¬ 
telligence.  At  one  time  it  would  be  a  word  that 
would  lead  to  the  marshalling  of  the  fighting  men 
without  the  gate,  that  they  might  go  forth  in  orderly 
array.  To  the  same  place  they  would  return  and 
would  be  mustered  out  after  dividing  the  spoil.  At 
another  time  news  of  some  calamity  was  brought  to 
the  gate,  the  death  of  the  King  or  of  a  son  of  the 
King,  the  messenger  appearing  with  torn  garment, 
dishevelled,  and  dust-covered  hair.  Immediately  there 
were  loud  lamentations,  garments  were  torn  and 
faces  were  covered.  The  maidens  of  such  a  city 
were  frequently  seen  near  the  gate.  Thither,  in  case 
of  the  smaller  cities,  at  least,  they  would  come  for 
water,  their  water-jars  borne  upon  the  head  grace¬ 
fully,  and  forming  a  pleasant  contrast  to  the  gay 
colours  with  which  they  were  decked.  Thither,  the 
maidens  also  came  to  welcome  the  coming  of  the  King 
or  other  distinguished  personage,  or  to  greet  with 
song  and  dance  victors  of  war  laden  with  booty. 

The  larger  cities  in  process  of  time  had  their 
aqueducts,  which  brought  pure  water  from  distant 
hills.2  Little  was  done  in  the  way  of  sewage  dis- 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  110  ff. 

3  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Biblica ,  vol.  i.,  c.  881  f. 


144  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


posal  until  under  the  domination  of  the  priests  an 
era  of  cleanliness  if  not  of  godliness  came  into  vogue. 
Yet  there  was  outside  the  city  gate  the  inevitable  rub¬ 
bish-pile,  the  city-dump,  suggesting  the  old  saying 
of  Yahweh,  the  friend  of  the  poor  :  “  He  taketh  the 
needy  from  the  city-dump  and  maketh  him  to  sit 
among  the  nobles  ( i.e .,  among  the  liberal,  the  well- 
circumstanced,  and  generous  -  hearted).”  The  fam¬ 
ished,  greedy  dogs  of  these  cities,  little  as  they  add¬ 
ed  to  them  sesthetically,  served  a  useful  purpose  as 
scavengers  ;  but  it  is  to  be  feared  that,  on  the  whole, 
city  life  was  far  from  being  as  healthful  as  village 
life.  It  surely  was  not  as  invigorating  morally. 


CHAPTER  VI 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  LIFE 

During  the  centuries  which  immediately  followed 
their  settlement  in  Canaan,  flocks  and  herds  had  been 
the  chief  dependence  of  the  Hebrews,  for  they  took  to 
agriculture  but  slowly.  Wheat  and  barley,  the  olive 
and  the  grape,  they  learned  to  cultivate,  but  there  is 
nothing  to  show  that  there  was  any  great  variety  of 
agricultural  staples.  It  is  different  during  the  pe¬ 
riod  we  are  now  considering.  Life  becomes  distinc¬ 
tively  agricultural.1  A  great  variety  of  products  ap¬ 
pears.  They  still  have  flocks  and  herds,  but  the  main 
dependence  is  upon  agriculture.  Wheat  and  barley 
are  the  great  staples;  the  olive  and  the  grape  are 
even  more  widely  cultivated ;  but  beans,  lentils,  and 
other  products  are  mentioned.  Wine  was  univer¬ 
sally  used,  and  strong  drink,  made  probably  of  the 
juices  of  other  fruit  than  the  grape,  for  the  for¬ 
tification  of  wine  was  probably  unknown,  was  pro¬ 
duced.  Familiar  among  the  sights  of  rural  life  was 
the  wine-press.  The  possession  of  one  was  even 
more  a  mark  of  distinction  among  them  than  the 
threshing-floor  with  its  oxen  and  threshing-sledge. 
Primitive  methods  of  agriculture  prevailed.  Imple- 

1  Wellhausen,  Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  408;  Kittel,  Hist,  of 
the  Hebrews ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  296. 


145 


146  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ments  were  used,  but  were  still  of  rude  construction. 
The  mention  of  the  yoke,  the  plough,  the  ox-goad, 
the  cart  and  the  wagon,  the  harness,  the  harrow,  the 
mattock,  the  axe,  the  sickle,  the  basket,  etc.,  but  par¬ 
tially  suggests  a  type  of  life  in  which  work  was  done 
very  largely  by  hand,  thus  necessitating  the  employ¬ 
ment  of  all,  old  and  young,  at  certain  seasons,  as  in 
the  earlier  time. 

Small  farmers  there  were,  though  the  land  might 
be  in  the  hands  of  village  communities  or  septs  ; 
but  large  estates  upon  which  scores  of  slaves  were 
employed  were  not  uncommon.  The  thought  that 
the  land  was  carefully  distributed  at  this  time  among 
an  innumerable  multitude  of  small  proprietors  is 
foreign  to  fact.  Those  who  had  been  able  to  take 
to  themselves  large  holdings  and  utilise  them  had 
done  so.  Apparently,  no  known  customs  or  laws 
interfered  with  their  so  doing.  It  was  only  with  the 
lapse  of  centuries  that  land  laws  were  enacted.  At 
first  the  matter  of  tenure  had  been  vested  in  the 
clan,  in  which  as  the  population  was  sparse  and  land 
was  abundant,  there  would  always  be  a  disposition  to 
favour  him  who  could  utilise  large  portions.  Kings 
had  their  royal  estates,  and  princes  were  known  as 
raisers  of  sheep  and  cultivators  of  the  vine  and  the 
olive.  As  in  Israel,  so  it  was  without,  as  in  Moab. 
Like  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,1  the  Hebrews 
seem  not  to  have  thought  any  the  less  of  kings  and 
princes  if  they  engaged  in  agriculture  and  business, 
especially  if  agents  or  overseers  were  employed.  As 
a  rule,  kings  might  not  closely  look  after  their  royal 
1  Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians ,  p.  150. 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  LIFE 


147 


domain,  but  a  prince  like  Absalom  found  it  easily 
possible  to  personally  superintend  bis  own  farm  or 
ranch. 

The  industrial  life  became  richer  and  more  com¬ 
plex  in  many  ways  during  this  period.  There  was  a 
tendency  to  do  more  outside  the  home  and  off  the 
estate.  There  were  men  who  supported  themselves 
by  particular  handicrafts.  Seldom  as  the  smith  and 
the  potter  appear  in  ancient  literature,  they  were  in 
evidence,  as  were  carpenters,  masons,  and  workers  in 
bronze  and  silver  and  gold.  Architecture  was  in  the 
main  simple  and  plain  to  a  degree  that  must  have 
rendered  the  smaller  towns  far  from  picturesque,  royal 
residences  and  the  homes  of  the  wealthy  being  ex¬ 
ceptions  to  the  rule.  The  forced  labour  of  the  King, 
which  was  not  employed  in  constructing  residences 
for  royalty  or  temples,  which,  like  that  of  Solomon, 
were  little  more  than  royal  chapels,  was  utilised  in 
building  city  walls,  constructing  aqueducts,  and  other 
works  of  public  utility.  That  old  life  cannot  be  un¬ 
derstood  unless  account  is  taken  of  the  place  occu¬ 
pied  by  this  forced  labour.  The  murmurs  and  com¬ 
plaints  which  late  writers  put  in  the  mouths  of  the 
earlier  Israelites  may  not  have  been  altogether  with¬ 
out  warrant,  for  kings  may  have  made  them  handle 
the  mattock  and  bear  burdens  in  their  levies ;  but 
the  major  part  of  this  forced  labour  must  have  been 
Canaanitish  or  foreign.  Very  frequently  it  was 
more  to  a  king’s  advantage  to  spare  and  thus  utilise 
a  subject  people  or  a  conquered  enemy  than  it  was 
to  put  them  to  the  sword,  and  consequently  economic 
rather  than  humanitarian  reasons  carried  the  day. 


148  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


The  home  was  still  a  hive  of  industry.  Here 
curds  and  cheese  and  butter  as  dairy  products  were 
manufactured.  Here  grain  was  parched  or  ground  ; 
here  flesh  was  both  boiled  and  roasted.  The  men¬ 
tion  of  the  numerous  terms  for  kettles  alone  suggests 
a  type  of  life  beside  which  that  of  the  old  Saxon  and 
Danish  kings  of  England  seems  exceedingly  prim¬ 
itive.  Not  so  was  it  as  regards  bread  and  pastry 
making,  a  hole  in  the  ground  in  which  stones  were 
heated  being  employed  for  this  purpose.  In  the 
home  cloth  was  woven  and  garments  were  made,  the 
raw  material  as  flax  and  wool  being  prepared  and 
spun  therein  as  in  the  earlier  time.  Cotton  ap¬ 
parently,  and  linen  and  woollen  fabrics  certainly, 
were  among  the  staple  products  of  the  home.  The 
garments  worn  by  both  sexes,  which  differed  not 
materially,  were  two,  the  tunic  or  shirt,  which  though 
usually  sleeveless  and  short,  might  be  worn  long  with 
sleeves,  and  an  outer  garment  or  robe.  A  tunic  of 
ends  or  extremities,  i.e .,  a  long  tunic  reaching  to  the 
ankles  and  wrists,  was  worn  only  by  the  wealthy  and 
those  of  royal  birth.  Such,  and  not  a  garment  of 
many  colours,  as  even  our  Revisers  insist  on  calling 
it,  was  the  garment  worn  by  Tamar,  as  it  was  also 
the  garment  given  Joseph  by  his  father.  The  outer 
garment  was  a  more  conspicuous  part  of  one’s  attire. 
This  when  worn  by  the  poor  was  of  coarse,  cheap 
material ;  but  the  robes  worn  by  the  wealthy  were 
frequently  rich  and  costly.  No  part  of  the  dress  was 
more  prized  than  the  girdle,  which  might  be  elabo¬ 
rately  and  beautifully  wrought.  The  present  of  such 
a  girdle  to  a  friend  was  considered  a  special  mark  of 


THE  INDUSTKIAL  LIFE 


149 


favour.  That  the  home  was  a  place  in  which  useful 
articles  were  manufactured  for  trade  is  unquestion¬ 
ably  true.  It  was  from  the  home  very  largely  that 
village  and  city  shops  were  supplied ;  though  the 
home  with  the  shop  or  counter  was  often  the  place 
of  both  manufacture  and  sale.  From  the  home  also 
must  have  been  taken  many  of  the  fabrics  and  util¬ 
ities  which  were  sold  at  the  great  fairs  at  the  re¬ 
ligious  festivals. 

Without  the  home,  by  pool  or  wady  side,  or  near 
the  cistern  upon  which  they  depended  for  water,  gar¬ 
ments  were  washed.  This  was  usually  done  by 
pounding  or  treading  the  clothing  in  the  water.  The 
verb  here  is  suggestive ;  it  means  “  to  tread.”  The 
cistern  was  found  ordinarily  in  small  villages  and  in 
the  country  where  it  seemed  not  worth  while  to  have 
a  well.1  Even  Bethlehem,  which  in  David’s  day  had 
its  well,  has  for  centuries  depended  upon  a  cistern  at 
which  reverent  pilgrims  have  slaked  their  thirst  in 
the  thought  that  they  were  drinking  at  the  well  of 
Bethlehem. 

It  is  just  here  in  connection  with  the  industrial 
life  that  we  catch  sight  of  most  of  those  things  which 
give  to  a  country  and  people  much  which  we  are 
wont  to  characterise  as  local  colour.  Some  things 
which  we  glimpse  as  we  project  ourselves  in  thought 
back  into  that  old  time,  and  run  to  and  fro  in  the 
land,  have  not  to  do  directly  with  the  industrial  life, 
but  most  of  them  have.  The  whitewashed,  dingy 
buildings  over  which  the  light  often  plays  in  a  fasci¬ 
nating  way,  catch  our  eye.  The  imposing  walls  of 

1  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  880  f. ;  Hastings’  Die.,  vol.  i.,  p.  444. 


150  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  larger  towns  and  cities,  with  their  individual  gate 
and  the  inevitable  watch-tower,  arrest  our  attention, 
and  we  find  ourselves  wondering  if  the  keeper  will 
admit  us  or  force  us  to  remain  without  as  suspicious- 
looking  wayfarers.  If  once  we  get  within,  we  are 
likely,  we  know,  to  be  most  kindly  and  hospitably 
taken  in  hand  by  some  citizen  who  will  count  it  a 
privilege  to  show  us  “  the  kindness  of  Elohim.”  The 
sights  and  sounds  of  soldierty  life  and  warfare  as  we 
try  to  reproduce  that  old  time  may  seem  to  more 
powerfully  arrest  the  attention,  or  those  associated 
with  royalty  may ;  but,  after  all,  it  was  not  the  sound 
of  the  horn  summoning  to  war  the  fighting  men,  it 
was  the  noise  of  children  at  their  play  that  was  most 
frequently  heard.  It  was  not  the  wailing  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  over  the  death  of  some  prince,  it  was  the  sound 
of  peaceful  industries  that  broke  upon  the  air.  It 
was  not  the  stoning  of  some  reprobate,  but  the  in¬ 
coming  of  an  ass  bearing  a  skin  of  wine  from  a 
neighbouring  village,  or,  better,  a  sack  of  wheat ;  not 
the  fall  of  a  gate-tower,  but  the  departure  of  a  cara¬ 
van  ;  not  the  devastation  of  a  plague,  but  the  rise  of 
a  new  city :  these  were  the  things  which  made  up 
the  life  of  the  people  and  gave  to  that  life  the  larger 
part  of  its  local  colour. 

Apart  from  the  institution  of  slavery,  there  were 
strong  lines  of  demarcation  in  the  social  life  of  the 
Hebrews.  There  were  the  beggars  and  other  out¬ 
casts,  as  there  were  also  worthless  fellows  who  were 
lawless  and  capable  of  any  crime  then  known.  Then 
there  were  the  rich  and  the  poor.  If  the  former 
would  not  be  considered  possessed  of  ample  means 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  LIFE 


151 


if  judged  by  our  standards,  there  can  be  no  question 
as  to  the  latter.  A  man  so  poor  that  he  must  needs 
pawn  his  outer  garment  that  he  may  have  the  where¬ 
withal  to  buy  the  food  he  is  to  eat  ere  he  is  paid  at 
night,  when  he  may  redeem  his  garment,  and  this, 
too,  day  after  day,  is  poor  in  our  eyes  beyond  a 
doubt.  Yet  such,  wrretched  as  they  were,  might  rise 
out  of  their  poverty.  Though  forced  to  take  to  the 
city-dump  for  lodgings,  the  needy  might  lift  himself 
out  of  his  misery.  It  was  a  long  way  among  the 
Hebrews  of  those  times  from  the  city-dump  to  a 
seat  among  the  nobles  of  the  land ;  but  Yahweh. 
knew  the  way.  And  just  here  we  catch  a  glimpse 
of  one  of  the  most  hopeful  features  of  that  old  time 
and  life — labour  was  so  held  in  honour  the  poor 
unfortunate  might  lift  himself  by  industry,  thrift,  and 
integrity  into  a  position  of  honour. 

In  speaking  of  the  industrial  life,  a  few  wrords  need 
to  be  said  of  roads  and  travel,  though  there  had  been 
little  improvement  here  as  compared  with  the  earlier 
time.  We  read  of  highways  or  turnpikes  during  this 
period.  There  is  no  possibility  of  misunderstanding 
the  word ;  mesillali  (nbDtt)  is  a  raised  road.  The 
term  could  hardly  be  used  of  ordinary  roadways ;  it 
suggests  that  something  was  done  in  parts  of  the 
land  near  the  larger  cities  in  the  way  of  road  build¬ 
ing.  The  levy,  or  forced  labour  of  the  King,  would 
easily  render  this  possible.1  Nevertheless,  the  roads 
for  the  most  part  were  poor,  and  in  many  parts  of 
the  land  there  were  no  attempts  at  road  construction. 
The  numerous  wTords  for  a  path  reveal  that  a  way 
1  Num.  xxi.  22  ;  cf.  2  Sam.  xx.  12  ff. 


152  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

along  which  asses  and  mules  could  walk  was  all  that 
most  regions  possessed.  Bridges  were  seldom  needed 
save  in  times  of  heavy  rain,  as  even  the  largest  streams 
could  be  forded.  There  can  hardly  have  been  a  ferry 
at  the  Jordan,  as  our  translators  have  misled  us  into 
supposing.  The  term  may  be  otherwise  very  reason¬ 
ably  explained.  Carts,  two-wheeled  vehicles,  and 
wagons  of  four  wheels  were  more  frequently  used 
during  this  period  than  earlier  for  conveying  heavy 
merchandise.  Asses  were  universally  employed,  she- 
asses  being  still  in  favour,  though  mules  were  used 
by  the  wealthy,  as  were  horses  singly  or  by  twos  and 
threes  in  chariots.  The  horse  found  favour  in  times 
of  war  as  especially  adapted  to  the  soldiery.  As  the 
population  multiplied  and  the  peoples  among  whom 
the  Hebrews  lived  put  themselves  more  and  more  in 
their  hands,  travel  appears  to  have  increased.  The 
traditional  jealousies  of  the  Northern  and  Southern 
Kingdoms  did  not  keep  their  people  from  having  con¬ 
siderable  commercial  and  social  intercourse. 


CHAPTER  VII 


WARFARE 

In  the  actual  life  of  the  Hebrews  warfare  played 
an  important  part,  though  the  state  was  not  organ¬ 
ised  upon  a  military  basis,  and  the  standing  armies, 
that  is,  the  seasoned  soldiers  who  were  kept  from  in¬ 
dustrial  pursuits  or  who  were  hired  from  neighbour¬ 
ing  peoples,  as  was  the  case  even  in  the  time  of 
David,  were  not  large — a  few  thousand  at  the  most. 
Kings  were  forced  to  rely  chiefly  upon  levies  from 
among  the  peasantry ;  and  such  troops  made,  as 
might  naturally  be  supposed,  sorry  work  of  warfare, 
though  the  Hebrews,  like  other  Semites,  w'ere  not 
lacking  in  soldierly  qualities.  Fortunately  for  them 
the  Hebrews  were  seldom  opposed  by  forces  more 
disciplined  than  their  own  before  the  Assyrian  armies 
in  the  ninth  century  began  to  devote  attention  to 
them.  We  have  to  do  then,  in  this  chapter,  with  war¬ 
fare  not  so  much  as  an  art  as  an  occasional  practice 
or  diversion,  and  the  effects  of  it  as  so  prosecuted 
upon  the  social  life.  That  warfare  was  sometimes 
with  them  a  diversion,  a  raid  being  made  or  a  cam¬ 
paign  being  undertaken  with  the  hope  of  spoil,  we 
know.  Whatever  may  be  true  of  progressive  nations 
to-day,  morality  was  among  the  old  Hebrews  largely 
a  matter  of  locality. 


153 


154  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Among  the  prices  which  they  had  to  pay  royalty 
for  condescending  to  live  among  them  was  that  of 
fighting  for  their  houses  both  north  and  south  as  the 
caprice  of  a  king  might  dictate.  Rebellions  in  the 
days  of  David  and  Solomon  and  frequent  quarrels 
with  Philistines,  Edomites,  Moabites,  Ammonites, 
and  Syrians  would,  however,  necessitate  considerable 
in  the  way  of  stern  fighting,  in  which,  whenever  the 
enemy  got  the  better  of  them,  there  was  often  need¬ 
less  and  brutal  slaughter,  for  the  laws  of  modern 
warfare  were  then  unknown  and  the  common  princi¬ 
ples  of  humanity  unrecognised. 

The  bodyguard  of  the  King,  his  little  standing 
army,  was  always  ready  for  action  and  really  by  its 
services  made  itself  indispensable.1  It  appears  to 
have  consisted  of  different  bodies  of  men,  some  of 
whom  were  more  lightly  armed  than  others,  but  all 
of  whom  were  well  equipped  according  to  the  best 
standards  of  military  science  in  those  days  and  some 
of  whom  by  their  great  stature  and  strength  were 
considered  well-nigh  unconquerable.  In  the  north 
chariots  to  some  extent  came  into  use ;  but  there 
could  have  been  little  use  for  them  in  the  south.2 
Hilly  Judea  was  ill  adapted  to  them.  The  fighting 
men  were  quickly  gathered  by  the  sounding  of  trum¬ 
pets  or  horns  throughout  the  land.  Among  these, 
bowmen  seem  to  have  predominated,  while  men 
armed  with  spear  and  shield  were  to  be  found  in 
large  numbers.  To  beat  their  swords  into  plough- 

1  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  312  ff.  ;  Kittel,  His. 
of  the  Hebrews ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  164  f. 

s  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i  ,  c.  725. 


WARFARE 


155 


shares  and  their  spears  into  pruning  hooks,  or  the 
opposite  figure,  was  used  so  frequently  by  their 
prophets  as  to  suggest  the  very  general  employment 
of  these  weapons.  That  most  adults  were  equipped 
in  some  way,  though  but  indifferently,  for  warfare,  is 
certain.  It  is  interesting  to  notice  that  with  many 
the  club  and  the  sling  were  slow  in  giving  way  to 
other  weapons.  For  a  man  to  be  unprepared  and  to 
fail  to  respond  when  the  summons  came  would  be  for 
him  to  lose  very  largely  his  social  standing,  to  say 
the  least.  Yah  well  as  their  God  had  his  place  among 
them  as  the  God  of  battles. 

The  Ark  with  its  ephod  was  considered  indispen¬ 
sable.  It  was  borne  before  their  armies  with  the 
cry  as  they  took  it  up  :  “  Rise,  O  Yahweh,  and  let 
thine  enemies  be  scattered,  and  let  them  that  hate 
thee  flee  before  thee.” 

The  men  were  divided  into  hundreds  and  thousands 
with  their  appropriate  leaders,  captains  of  hundreds 
and  captains  of  thousands,  if  on  their  arrival  by  sept 
or  clan  they  were  not  thus  organised.  There  is  little 
doubt  that  in  most  parts  they  had  their  local  organisa¬ 
tions  corresponding  to  the  militia  of  some  modern  na¬ 
tions.  Many,  aside  from  the  regular  forces,  or  body¬ 
guard  of  the  King,  had  their  armour,  which,  however 
rude,  would  offer  some  protection.  It  is  not  known 
that  the  leaders  were  distinguished  by  their  dress,  but 
we  know  that  among  the  Hebrews,  as  among  the  As¬ 
syrians,  kings  went  into  battle  wearing  their  crowns 
and  royal  robes  and  regalia.1  When  Saul  fell  on 
Mount  Gilboah  he  was  wearing  his  golden  crown  and 

1  1  Kings  xxii.  30  ff. 


156  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


anklets,  and  according  to  an  improbable  story  they 
were  taken  to  David  by  an  Amalekite  who  hoped  to 
be  rewarded.1  In  battle  the  bowmen  were  specially 
dreaded,  the  arrow  drawn  by  a  strong  arm  being 
their  most  formidable  weapon  and  capable  of  fearful 
execution  among  men  but  imperfectly  armoured. 
The  battle  array,  or  line  of  battle,  and  some  sort  of 
phalanx  were  not  unknown ;  but  disorder  in  battle 
seems  to  have  been  the  rule  and  could  hardly  have 
been  otherwise  among  undisciplined  troops. 

If  the  forces  of  the  enemy  were  encountered  in 
the  open  field,  it  was  considered  fortunate,  for  other¬ 
wise  it  might  be  necessary  to  besiege  and  reduce  the 
city  into  which  they  had  fled  before  an  end  could  be 
made  to  the  war.  Where  the  enemy  showed  an 
eagerness  for  the  fray,  there  might  be  delay,  while 
picked  men  or  single  individuals  fought  not  in  sport 
but  in  mortal  combat.  Such  contests,  though  they 
might  serve  as  excitants,  proved  sometimes  brutal 
butcheries.2  As  they  were  about  to  join  battle  they 
raised  a  great  cry  or  yell,  a  custom  still  in  vogue, 
which  has  its  psychological  reasons  as  well  as  its  ex¬ 
treme  antiquity,  which  may  be  pled  in  its  favour. 
Where  the  enemy  retired  to  a  walled  and  strongly 
fortified  city,  considerable  time  might  elapse  before 
he  could  be  brought  to  submission,  if,  indeed,  it  were 
possible  to  reduce  him.  David’s  flight  from  Jeru¬ 
salem  was  probably  quite  as  much  because  he  feared 
his  capital  would  not  be  able  to  endure  a  siege  as 
because  he  doubted  the  loyalty  of  some  near  him. 
Later,  upon  his  return,  his  fear  in  the  rebellion  of 
1  2  Sam.  i.  10  ff.  3  2  Sam.  ii.  14  ff. 


WARFARE 


157 


Sheba  was  that  Amasa  by  want  of  promptitude  would 
allow  the  rebel  to  get  north  with  his  forces  into  some 
walled  city.  “  Now,”  said  the  King,  “  shall  Sheba, 
the  son  of  Bichri,  do  us  more  harm  than  did  Absa¬ 
lom  :  take  thou  thy  lord’s  servants  and  pursue  after 
him,  lest  he  get  him  fortified  cities,  and  escape  out 
of  our  sight.”  1  This  difficulty  which  the  Hebrews 
met  in  reducing  forces  so  circumstanced  would  hard¬ 
ly  be  worth  mentioning,  so  common  was  the  expe¬ 
rience  in  those  days  and  until  the  invention  of  gun¬ 
powder  and  other  high  explosives,  were  it  not  that 
an  advance  is  noticeable  in  strategy  on  the  part  of 
the  Hebrews  just  here.  Something  like  several 
months,  if  not  a  year,  appears  to  have  been  spent  in 
reducing  by  siege  Kabbath-Ammon,  the  chief  city  of 
Ammon,  as  the  name  suggests.  When  at  last  Joab 
secured  possession  of  the  fortified  water-works  of  the 
city,  and  perceived  that  the  famished  people  could 
not  hold  out  much  longer,  he  sent  to  David  that  he 
might  come  and  be  on  hand  to  receive  the  submis¬ 
sion  of  the  long-besieged  city.2  But  Sheba,  already 
referred  to  above,  did  get  into  the  city  in  wdiich  his 
sept  dwelt ;  and  the  Hebrews  under  the  lead  of  J oab 
and  his  brother  came  upon  the  place  and,  to  render 
the  verb  literally  (for  baskets  were  used  then  as  still 
they  are  in  the  East),  poured  out  a  mound  against 
the  city  so  that  it  stood  even  with  the  wall  and  made 
it  possible  for  them  to  put  a  bridge  across.3  Only  by 
the  beheading  of  Sheba  and  the  casting  of  his  head 

1  2  Sam.  xx.  6. 

9  2  Sam.  xii.  26  ff.  Smith,  Samvel ,  /.  C .,  p.  326  f. 

3  2  Sam.  xx.  15;  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  C.,  p.  371  f. 


158  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


down  to  the  men  of  David  did  the  Bichrites  save 

themselves. 

Inasmuch  as  little  was  done  by  the  peoples  whom 
the  Hebrews  encountered  in  warfare  in  the  way  of 
organising  the  commissariat  before  setting  out  on  a 
campaign,  the  progress  of  an  army  through  their 
country  rendered  it  well  nigh  a  wilderness  for  a  dec¬ 
ade.  But  in  addition  to  the  necessities  of  provis¬ 
ioning,  crops  were  destroyed,  buildings  burnt  or 
pulled  down,  fruit-trees  felled,  springs  befouled  or 
choked  up,  and  sometimes  arable  land  was  strewn 
with  stones.  All  that  fiendish  ingenuity  could  de¬ 
vise  was  at  times  practised.  Where  an  army  was 
overcome,  or  where  a  city  was  taken,  spoil  was  made 
of  everything  of  value,  while  many  were  carried  into 
captivity.  To  an  even  greater  extent  than  in  the 
earlier  period  the  traffic  in  slaves  proved  an  incen¬ 
tive  to  such  warfare.  The  demand  was  greater  ;  the 
market  better.  The  armour  of  the  slain  went,  as 
as  among  the  Greeks,  to  the  slayer.  Whether  the 
general  was  bound  by  custom  to  reward  a  soldier 
that  captured  or  slew  some  great  rebel  or  adversary 
we  cannot  say.1  Undisciplined  as  they  were  in  arms, 
the  Hebrews  had  their  rules 2  and  precedents,  as  they 
had  also  their  military  proverbs.  “  Let  not  him  that 
putteth  on  his  armour  boast  himself  as  he  that  put- 
teth  it  off,”  was  one  of  the  latter;  while  the  appeal  to 
antiquity  furnished  them  with  precedents,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  folly  of  Abimelech,  the  son  of  Jerub- 
baal,  who  was  said  to  have  lost  his  life  at  the 
hands  of  a  woman  who  dropped  the  heavy  rider 
1  2  Sam.  xviii.  12.  s  1  Sam.  xxx.  24,  25. 


WAEFAEE 


159 


millstone  upon  him  as  lie  came  up  under  the  wall  of 
Tliebez.1 

If  in  any  direction  the  men  of  Israel  gained  by 
warfare  beyond  securing  for  themselves  for  centuries 
national  existence,  it  was  owing  to  the  fact  that  their 
larger  wars  with  neighbouring  peoples  brought  to¬ 
gether  the  men  of  their  different  clans.  Though 
their  military  organisations  must  have  been  largely 
according  to  clans,  actual  warfare  threw  individuals 
from  different  parts  of  the  land  together.  This 
helped  to  consolidate  the  diverse  elements  of  Judah 
more  than  any  other  one  thing,  unless  it  be  their 
religion.  So  also  were  the  various  and  somewhat 
disparate  elements  of  Joseph  united  into  a  kingdom 
in  which  there  was  considerable  loyalty  to  local  in¬ 
stitutions.  The  conspicuous  achievements  in  a  cam¬ 
paign  of  the  men  of  any  one  city  or  locality  would 
endear  them  to  all,  as  the  endurance  of  any  over¬ 
whelming  disaster  when  contending  for  the  general 
good  would  do.  There  are  notes  in  the  old  poetry 
of  the  Northern  Kingdom  that  reflect  this  feeling. 
This  poetry  belonged  to  them  as  a  people ;  they 
used  it  in  its  entirety,  and  were  correspondingly  in¬ 
fluenced  thereby. 

War  in  those  days,  even  more  than  in  ours,  must 
have  brutalised  men.  Society  was  not  only  disorgan¬ 
ised,  it  was  also  dehumanised  by  war,  so  needlessly 
bloody  and  cruel  was  it  and  so  little  disposed  was  the 
victor  to  allow  his  foe  to  settle  back  into  his  old 
ways.  To  the  conquerors  nearly  as  much  as  to  the 
conquered  certain  of  the  baser  effects  of  war  must 

1  2  Sam.  xi.  21. 


160  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


have  been  felt.  Had  it  not  been  for  the  quiet  and 
peaceful  days  spent  in  honest  toil  amidst  the  felici¬ 
ties  of  home  and  neighbourhood  life  which  the 
Hebrews  as  a  comparatively  insignificant  people 
among  the  greater  world-powers  enjoyed,  they  could 
hardly  have  wrought  out  for  us  some  of  the  noble 
sentiments  and  lofty  ideals  which  we  find  in  the 
prophets  of  the  closing  century  of  our  period. 


CHAPTER  VIII 


LITERATURE  AND  EDUCATION 

It  is  extremely  doubtful  whether  the  Hebrew 
nomads  who  entered  the  land  of  Canaan  in  the  thir¬ 
teenth  century  B.c.  were  possessed  of  a  written  liter¬ 
ature  ;  though  some  of  their  number  may  have  made 
some  small  use  of  letters.  The  rough  life  of  the 
desert  must  have  been  unfriendly  to  such  culture ; 
while  the  life  which  the  people  lived  in  Egypt  must 
have  been  a  life  out  of  touch  with  its  advanced  civili¬ 
sation.  It  seems  probable  that  the  art  of  writing 
must  have  been  learned  of  the  Canaanites.  The  Tell- 
el-Amarna  tablets  reveal  the  fact  that  letters  were 
not  unknown  in  Canaan  long  prior  to  this  time.  We 
may  suppose  that  the  folk-stories  and  battle-odes,  of 
which  we  have  remnants  in  the  Book  of  Judges,  were 
not  committed  to  writing  until  some  time  after  they 
were  composed.1  That  there  was  no  written  litera¬ 
ture  in  Israel  prior  to  the  compilation  of  J  in  the 
ninth  century,  cannot  be  maintained.  The  evidence 
is  against  such  a  supposition.  Much  of  the  material 
used  by  J  must  have  long  been  in  written  form. 
Bays  W.  H.  Bennett :  “  The  reader  will  remember 

1  Budde,  The  Folk-Songs  of  Israels  The  Neiv  World ,  March, 
1893.  “  In  ancient  times,  only  by  a  happy  chance  and  very 

exceptionally  were  poems  of  this  kind  put  into  writing  and  trans¬ 
mitted  to  posterity.” 


161 


162  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 

that,  before  the  close  of  the  eighth  century,  the  Isra¬ 
elites  already  possessed  numerous  narratives,  poems, 
and  other  monuments  of  the  revelation  they  had  re¬ 
ceived  through  their  national  experience  and  their 
inspired  teachers.  During  the  later  monarchy  and 
the  Captivity  these  earlier  documents  were  com¬ 
bined  in  larger  works,  with  various  additions  and 
other  modifications.” 

Dr.  Ixittel  in  his  History  of  the  Hebrews ,  vol.  ii.,  p. 
95  f.,  is  even  more  explicit :  “  The  discovery  of  the 
art  of  writing  is,  beyond  doubt,  the  most  important 
triumph  of  civilisation.  When  and  in  what  form  this 
art  reached  Israel,  we  cannot  say.  If,  as  I  believe, 
Moses  was  a  historical  personage  and  had  been  in 
Egypt,  he  would  most  likely  have  adopted  the  Egyp¬ 
tian  mode  of  writing.  But  we  know  at  the  same  time 
that  there  was  early  used  in  Palestine  a  new  way  of 
writing— the  alphabetic,  or,  strictly  speaking,  con¬ 
sonantal  script,  in  which  the  phonetic  principle, 
already  known  to  the  Egyptians,  though  not  carried 
out  by  them,  was  recognised  in  its  immeasurable 
importance.  This  script  originated  as  a  consonantal 
script  in  Semitic  soil,  and  was  thence  adopted  by  the 
Graeco-Roman  civilised  world — with  results  incal¬ 
culably  great  for  it  and  for  our  civilisation.  We  are 
told  that  Jerubbaal- Gideon  had  written  down  for 
him  by  a  young  man  of  Succoth,  casually  picked  up, 
the  seventy-seven  names  of  the  aldermen  and  coun¬ 
cil  of  the  town.  If  the  statement  is  credible,  this 
fact  alone  shows  such  a  general  spread  of  the  art 
of  writing  as  was  possible  only  by  the  help  of  the 
extraordinary  simplification  produced  in  that  art,  in 


LITERATURE  AND  EDUCATION 


163 


its  older  form  so  complicated,  by  writing  the  conso¬ 
nants  alone.1  .  .  .  The  consequence  of  the  in¬ 

troduction  of  the  new  script  was  the  beginning  of 
real  literature.  Now,  the  first  heroic  lays  and  the 
oldest  laws  referred  to  Moses,2  perhaps  also,  even 
several  hero  stories,  such  as  those  of  Jerubbaal  and 
Abimelech,  were  reduced  to  writing— promising  be¬ 
ginning  of  a  rich  literature  that  has  outlived  the 
centuries.” 

Dr.  Kautzsch,  in  his  Literature  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment ,  takes  a  similar  position  as  to  the  compilation 
of  the  great  historical  documents.  He  even  goes  so 
far  as  to  attempt  to  assign  approximately  the  date  of 
many  of  the  earlier  pieces  of  Hebrew  literature.  “  In 
Israel,  as  in  other  nations,  the  earliest  literary  period 
was  preceded  by  one  of  song  and  legend.  The  con¬ 
ditions  on  which,  in  every  age,  the  appearance  of  a 
real  literature  depends — above  all,  the  wide  diffusion 
of  the  arts  of  writing  and  reading ,  the  settled  life  and 
comparative  prosperity  of  the  people — did  not  exist 
in  Israel  till  near  the  end  of  the  so-called  age  of  the 
Judges,  certainly  not  during  the  Journey  through  the 
Desert  or  whilst  the  tribes  were  incessantly  strug¬ 
gling  for  existence,  after  the  immigration  into  Ca¬ 
naan.”  3  He  also  declares  :  “  It  has  been  thought 
necessary  to  date  the  beginnings  of  a  real  literature 

1  It  must  be  said  of  this  last  statement  that  it  lacks  logical 
cogency.  The  author’s  observation  (vol.  ii.,  p.  95)  that  the 
writing  on  the  Mesha  stele  proves  “long  previous  practice  in  the 
use  of  a  script,”  is  more  conclusive. — Cr. 

'l  “  Especially  Ex.  xx.  ff.  (Decalogue  and  Book  of  the  Cove¬ 
nant).” 

3  Page  1  of  the  above-named  work. 


164  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


not  later  than  this  period,  the  second  half  of  the  time 
of  the  Judges.  It  must  be  acknowledged  possible  as 
early  as  this,  perhaps  at  sanctuaries  which  had  long 
been  famous,  such  as  those  at  Shiloh  and  Bethel, 
among  a  hereditary  priesthood  of  old  standing,  the 
writing  down  of  ancient  songs  or  of  the  histories  of 
these  sanctuaries  was  taken  in  hand.  But,”  he  adds, 
“no  actual  proof  can  be  adduced.  It  would  rather 
appear  that  we  must  come  down  to  the  time  of  David 
for  the  writing  out  of  the  products  of  those  earlier 
days.”  It  is  interesting  to  notice  that  this  scholar 
names  as  the  probable  date  of  the  Book  of  the  Cove¬ 
nant  in  its  original  form,  prior  to  857  B.c. ;  of  the  Saul 
stories  in  1  Samuel  ix.  ff.  from  911  to  888  B.c.  ;  of  the 
David  stories  in  1  Samuel  xvi.  14  ff. — 1  Kings  ii. 
and  the  stories  of  David  found  in  2  Samuel  v.-vii. 
and  ix.-xx.  912 ;  the  E  hero  stories  of  the  Book  of 
Judges,  from  933  to  912  ;  the  Blessing  of  Jacob  (Gen. 
xlix.  1-27) ;  the  Book  of  the  Upright  Ones  ;  the  Book 
of  the  Wars  of  Yahweh ;  and  the  original  form  of  the 
Balaam  discourses  (Num.  xxiii.  f.),  prior  to  933. 1 
Schultz,  in  his  Old  Testament  Theology  (vol.  i.,  p. 
64),  asserts :  “Not  only  must  the  collection  of  Laws 
in  Exodus  xxi.-xxiii.  be  older  than  the  year  800  B.c., 
but  a  much  larger  part  of  the  Pentateuch.”  It  has 
been  frequently  claimed  of  late  that  the  higher  crit¬ 
ics  hold  that  writing  was  not  cultivated  among  the 
Hebrews  prior  to  the  compilation  of  J.  Such  is  not 
the  fact.  The  higher  critics  are  quick  to  respond  to 

3  These  dates  of  Dr.  Kautzsch  are  probably  too  early  by  a  cen¬ 
tury.  Presumably  in  giving  them  be  sought  to  be  cautious  and 
conservative. 


LITERATURE  AND  EDUCATION 


1G5 


the  evidence  of  a  much  earlier  date ;  though  they  are 
quite  generally  agreed  that  it  is  unsafe  to  assert  that 
they  cultivated  letters  prior  to  the  time  of  the  settle¬ 
ment  of  Canaan  by  these  nomads. 

In  Part  I.  we  took  occasion  to  speak  of  the  influ¬ 
ence  which  individuals  exerted  upon  the  social  life. 
We  dwelt  particularly  upon  the  old  vindicators  or 
heroes  who,  rallying  about  them  their  own  septs  and 
clans,  rid  their  people  for  the  time  at  least  of  the 
dangers  which  threatened  them,  or  eased  them  of  the 
burdens  they  were  bearing  and  the  wrongs  they  were 
made  to  suffer.  While  admitting  that  these  men, 
directly  through  their  achievements  and  indirectly 
through  the  fabulous  stories  told  of  them  in  the  old 
folk-lore  tales,  exercised  a  strong  formative  influence 
upon  the  lives  of  men  of  their  time  and  to  a  consid¬ 
erable  extent  upon  those  of  a  later  day,  we  also 
called  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  leading  freemen 
of  different  clans  had  much,  perhaps  more,  to  do  in 
quieter  ways  in  determining  the  life  and  character  of 
the  Hebrews.  The  most  pervasive  and  most  potent 
influences  are  always  out  of  sight  and  are  not  so  much 
those  of  individuals  as  of  social  aggregates  or  schools 
of  thought.  This  is  especially  true  of  the  period  of 
the  Hebrew  monarchy.  They  had  in  those  days 
their  great  men.  David,  Elijah,  Amos,  and  Isaiah, 
after  all  reasonable  deductions  are  made  from  the 
estimates  which  an  uncritical  age  has  placed  upon 
them,  are  admitted  to  have  been  for  their  time  men 
potent  in  achievement  and  in  the  influence  which 
they  exerted.  Here  also,  as  in  the  case  of  the  old 
vindicators,  there  was,  during  the  earlier  centuries  at 


166  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


least,  an  opportunity  for  the  play  of  fancy  which  was 
not  lost.  The  stories  of  the  lives  of  such  men  as 
David,  Solomon,  Elijah,  and  Elisha  were  so  told  as  to 
interest  greatly  and  to  stir  mightily  the  life  of  those 
times,  and,  indeed,  say  what  we  will  of  onr  saner 
ways  of  getting  at  the  facts  in  the  lives  of  their 
heroes,  these  old  stories  still  take  powerful  hold  of 
us.  Probably  a  plain  statement  of  what  Elijah,  for 
example,  did  in  the  way  of  attempting  to  save  North 
Israel  to  Yaliwism  would  not  stir  us  with  a  tithe  the 
power  that  the  story  does  when  taken  up  in  Men¬ 
delssohn’s  Elijah  where  the  story  as  well  as  the  music 
moves  us. 

But  other  influences  were  at  work  in  shaping 
Hebrew  life,  and  here  again  the  work  was  quietly 
and  unobtrusively  done.  There  were  literary  and 
social  movements  or  schools  which  proceeded  from 
unknown  men.  Take  the  greater  literary  achieve¬ 
ments  of  those  centuries.  The  legal  code  known 
as  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  and  much  more,  it  may 
be,  which  preceded  the  Holiness  Code  of  a  later  day, 
represented  the  summation  of  ancient  customs  and  of 
the  needs  of  the  life  in  which  it  took  shape  as  men 
of  sagacity  understood  those  customs  and  interpreted 
those  needs.  No  one  individual  could  have  done  this 
for  the  Hebrews.  The  same  is  true  with  respect  to 
the  great  narratives  of  their  past  and  the  chronicles 
of  their  own  centuries.  These  were  the  work  of 
social  aggregates  or  schools  in  Judah  and  Ephraim, 
as  critical  scholars  have  demonstrated,  though  for  the 
greater  convenience  we  refer  to  the  writer  of  J  or  of 
E.  And  what  an  influence  must  have  been  exerted 


LITERATURE  AND  EDUCATION 


1G7 


by  these  schools  and  all  that  went  before  them  in 
the  way  of  local  attempts  to  purify  sanctuaries,  to 
rectify  customs  which  were  injurious  or  antiquated 
and  to  reconstruct  their  past !  It  was  the  same  with 
the  prophetic  movement  of  which  we  shall  elsewhere 
speak.  Though  the  men  who  belonged  to  the  move¬ 
ment  seemed  very  largely  to  stand  by  themselves,  they 
yet  represented  a  certain  tendency  of  purpose  and  of 
endeavour  as  they  were  also  substantially  one  in 
their  achievements  in  literature  and  in  life. 

Here  then,  in  the  movements  which  reached  out  be¬ 
yond  the  individual  and  took  in  a  considerable  num¬ 
ber  of  strong  men,  we  discover  the  more  potent  influ¬ 
ences  which  shaped  the  social  life  of  the  people. 
Institutions  of  learning  they  may  not  have  had, 
schools  to  which  their  boys  wended  their  way  to  get 
the  rudiments  of  knowledge;  but  somewhere  these 
rudiments  were  learned  by  many  if  not  by  all ;  some¬ 
how  men  who  served  as  rulers  or  who  became  useful 
in  the  great  literary  and  civic  and  reform  movements 
of  their  day  received  some  training,  and  that,  too,  of 
a  character  not  wholly  inferior.  We  have  to  confess 
that  of  Hebrew  schools  during  this  period  we  know 
nothing.  That  princes  were  taught  to  read  and  write 
we  know.  David  himself  wrote  the  note  to  Joab 
which  sealed  the  fate  of  the  man  who  was  its  pitiful 
bearer.  Jezebel  wrote  in  the  name  of  Ahab  to  the 
sheiks  of  Samaria  when  Naboth  was  to  be  removed. 
Probably  education  was  far  from  universal.  Those 
who  could  afford  to  do  so  may  have  employed  private 
instructors  for  their  children.1  The  real  education  of 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  i. ,  p.  646  f. 


1G8  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

tlie  home  generally,  aside  from  manual  training  and 
the  discipline  it  entailed,  consisted  in  shaping  mind 
and  heart  by  the  frequent  repetition  of  the  old  folk¬ 
lore  tales  used  in  the  earlier  time  and  the  equally 
delightful  imaginative  literature  which  sprang  up 
so  prolifically  during  this  period.  Character  shaped 
under  the  influences  of  the  home,  reinforced  by  the 
best  oral  literature  the  day  afforded,  could  hardly 
have  come  up  to  modern  standards,  bat  it  was  at 
least  tolerably  fitted  for  grappling  with  the  sterner 
things  of  life. 

Somewhere  then,  we  must  conclude,  the  leading 
men  of  the  day,  and  especially  those  who  had  to  do 
with  the  literature,  were  trained.  The  literature  it¬ 
self,  crude  as  some  of  it  is,  evidences  this.  The  dirge 
over  Saul  and  Jonathan  and  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
were  written  by  men  that  had  had  some  literary 
training.  Even  Amos,  countryman  that  he  was,  with 
the  pleasant  odor  of  his  pastures  and  of  his  herd 
clinging  to  him,  had  probably  learned  to  write  as 
well  as  to  speak  forcefully  his  mother  tongue.  The 
literature  of  the  period  was  not  in  advance  of  the 
time  in  its  cosmological  and  geographical  ideas ;  the 
same  is  true  of  the  literature  as  it  had  to  do  with 
certain  other  sciences  then  cultivated,  but  it  was  in 
some  directions  fairly  up  with  it.  If  it  reveals  de¬ 
pendence  upon  Babylonia,  Phoenicia,  etc.,  in  so  do¬ 
ing  it  discovers  to  us  the  fact  that  the  Hebrews  of 
this  age  were  sufficiently  instructed  in  letters  and 
in  some  other  departments  of  thought  to  be  able  to 
absorb  these  ideas  as  they  came  in  their  way. 


CHAPTER  IX 


MANNERS  AND  MORALS 

Not  the  forms  of  courtesy  merely  but  real  courtesy 
characterised  the  old  Hebrews.  The  usual  greeting, 
put  often  interrogatively,  “  Shalom  ?  ”  had  to  do  with 
the  health  and  general  well-being  of  the  one  in¬ 
quired  after.  It  was  followed  by  the  same  word  used 
affirmatively.  The  fact  that  a  remark  or  behest  was 
courteously  put  appears  in  the  particle  which  was 
employed  to  soften  speech.  This  particle  (kd)  has 
sometimes  the  force  of  our  “  please,”  at  other  times 
it  renders  the  sentence  in  which  it  appears  an  en¬ 
treaty  or  a  quiet,  courteous  command.  The  wish  to 
placate  or  propitiate  another  is  revealed  very  fre¬ 
quently  where  the  speaker  was  the  superior  of  the 
one  addressed  in  age  or  social  station,  and  is  char¬ 
acteristic  of  the  people  who  were  not  haughty  or 
overbearing.  Kissing  even  among  males  was  no 
mere  matter  of  form,  as  frequent  prostrations  were 
not.  The  latter  revealed  the  Hebrew’s  conception 
of  the  dignity  and  worth  of  life  quite  as  much  as  they 
did  the  kneeler’s  wish  to  stand  well  in  the  eyes  of 
him  whom  he  thus  recognised  as  his  superior.  The 
Hebrew  as  a  Semite  was  thoughtful  rather  than  light 
and  frivolous ;  he  took  things  seriously,  though  he 
was  not  destitute  of  the  sense  of  humour,  as  is  seen 

109 


170  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

in  his  play  upon  words  and  in  other  simple  and  in¬ 
nocent  ways. 

The  genuineness  of  the  hospitality  of  the  Hebrews 
is  beyond  all  doubt.  To  be  inhospitable  was  not 
only  to  be  despicable,  it  was  also  to  be  irreligious. 
Hospitality  was  a  sacred  duty.  This  period  is 
even  richer  than  the  preceding  period  in  stories  of 
gracious  hospitality.  The  story  of  Abraham’s  enter¬ 
tainment  of  the  three  strangers  and  that  of  the  treat¬ 
ment  which  Elisha  experienced  at  the  hand  of  the 
Shunammite  and  her  husband  may  be  considered  typi¬ 
cal.  The  kindness  shown  the  guest  upon  leaving  was 
marked  by  genuine  courtesy.  Mere  interviews  could 
easily  be  terminated  by  a  blessing  upon  one’s  under¬ 
taking,  an  excellent  way  of  getting  rid  of  a  crank,  or 
of  putting  an  end  to  an  interview  that  bade  fair  to  be 
unduly  prolonged.  It  was  courteous  and  at  the  same 
time  dignified.  A  discourtesy  was  keenly  felt,  and  a 
failure  to  bestow  hospitable  treatment  where  it  was 
with  sufficient  reason  expected  was  considered  well 
nigh  criminal.  An  indignity  was  seldom  inflicted. 
Where  it  was  suffered  the  sufferer  was  loath  to  forget 
it.  The  treatment  which  David’s  envoys  received  at 
the  Court  of  Hanun  of  Ammon,  the  cutting  off  of 
half  their  clothing  and  of  half  their  beards,  was  con¬ 
sidered  peculiarly  distressing.1  It  was  in  the  eyes  of 
the  men  of  David  considered  a  sufficient  excuse  for 
war.  In  actual  warfare  all  sorts  of  indignities  were 
practised  quite  apart  from  mere  brutality.  Nothing 
could  exceed  the  shameless  way  in  which  captives  of 
war  were  often  led  about.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  the 


1  2  Sam.  x.  4  ff. 


MANNERS  AND  MORALS 


171 


Hebrews  in  these  respects  vied  with  their  neighbours. 
They  surely  did  not  show  the  foreigner  the  same  con¬ 
sideration  which  they  manifested  to  one  of  their  own 
people,  though  their  customs  and  laws  inculcated 
kindness  to  strangers  or  aliens.1  That  there  was  not 
the  bitterness  which  was  shown  in  the  post-exilic 
time  is,  however,  indisputable.  Aliens  might  become 
clients  of  free  citizens  ;  while  whole  clans  and  cities 
might  by  covenant  become  a  part  of  the  Hebrew 
state.  The  tribe  of  Judah  appears  to  have  been 
largely  constituted  in  this  way.  It  was  probably 
none  the  worse  for  it,  as  most  of  the  stock  incorpor¬ 
ated  was  racially  the  equal  of  their  own  in  sterling 
qualities.2 

Whether  manners  were  refined  by  city  life  may  be 
questioned.  Certainly  we  find  no  more  delightful 
stories  in  which  pity  and  kindness  appear  conspicu¬ 
ously  than  those  of  village  or  country  life.  But  cities 
offered  some  advantages  that  the  country  can  hardly 
have  put  within  easy  reach.  The  refining  influences 
of  such  music  and  literature  as  the  time  afforded 
must  have  been  more  felt  in  the  city  than  in  the 
country.  In  the  chief  cities  were  gathered  those  men 
who  were  students  of  their  past  and  wrought  as  pres¬ 
ent-day  chroniclers.  There,  too,  most  of  the  bards, 
who  still  repeated  the  old  stories  or  invented  new 
ones  to  suit  the  exigencies  of  the  hour,  must  have  had 

1  Some  of  their  literature  reveals  the  contrary.  The  story  which 
tells  of  Jacob’s  success  in  outwitting  Laban  may  here  be  mentioned. 
— Kautzsch,  Lit.  Old  Test.,  p.  37. 

2  It  is  just  here  that  we  discover  the  significance  of  the  incest 
story  of  Genesis  xxxviii. 


172  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


their  home.  Those  who  went  about  in  bands  singing 
and  playing  their  instruments  of  music  dwelt  in  the 
cities.  If  anywhere,  in  the  cities  culture  was  in  the 
very  air.  So  closely  were  these  in  touch  with  the  cult¬ 
ure  of  both  the  East  and  the  West,  that  the  danger 
of  underestimating  its  influence  is  one  to  which  the 
student  of  Hebrew  social  life  is  greatly  exposed. 

The  Hebrews  were  an  excitable  people,  easily 
moved  to  wrath  and  as  easily  pleased.  The  frequency 
with  which  verbs  occur  expressive  of  tremor  or  agita¬ 
tion  reveals  this  as  surely  as  do  authentic  records. 
Yet  such  excitation  did  not  usually  go  very  deep 
though  it  was  sincere.  It  was  easily  laid  aside.  Sui¬ 
cide  was  not  discountenanced.  A  man  might  make 
way  with  himself  and  yet  find  a  resting-place  without 
opposition  in  the  tomb  of  his  fathers.  Whether  sui¬ 
cide  was  common  is  another  question  and  one  that  is 
impossible  to  answer.  Probably  save  where  men 
were  fatally  wounded  in  battle  or  hopelessly  pressed 
by  the  enemy,  they  did  not  resort  to  self-destruction. 
Life,  on  the  whole,  was  satisfying  and  joyous.  There 
was  little  tendency  to  introspection,  and  men  were 
not  given  to  meditation.  They  had  their  words  for 
anxiety  and  depression,  but  had  little  use  for  them. 
Fearful  they  sometimes  were  ;  but,  then,  life  was  at 
times  insecure.  The  only  wonder  is  that  they  should 
have  remained  on  the  whole  as  joyous  as  they  con¬ 
tinued  to  be. 

Old  customs  were  cherished  and  old  traditions 
sacredly  guarded.  Many  usages  survived  for  cen¬ 
turies.  In  some  places  the  past  was,  it  is  true,  more 
cherished  than  in  others.  Certain  cities  had  the 


MANNERS  AND  MORALS 


173 


reputation  of  guarding  old  customs  and  traditions, 
and  to  these,  if  one  wished  to  know  the  pure  Israelit- 
ish  usages,  he  must  go.  When,  intent  on  capturing, 
dead  or  alive,  the  traitor,  Sheba,  the  son  of  Bichri, 
Joab  besieged  the  city  into  which  he  had  fled,  an  old 
woman  having  a  reputation  for  wisdom  was  sent  forth 
to  negotiate  with  him.1  She  made  request  that  the 
city  be  spared,  and  pled  its  antiquity  and  the  fact 
that  it  had  vied  with  Dan  as  a  centre  of  Israelitisli 
tradition.  Such  places  may  have  been  few  but  they 
were  significant,  as  they  were  also  influential.  It  is 
likely  that  such  cities  were  more  common  in  the  north 
than  in  the  south.  The  great  tribe  of  Joseph,  which 
remained  to  the  time  of  its  fall  remarkably  self-suffi¬ 
cient  and  comparatively  free  from  incorporated  for¬ 
eign  elements,  was  undoubtedly  conspicuous  in  this 
way.  Among  the  Ephraimites  much  of  the  histori¬ 
cal  lore  of  the  Hebrews  was  preserved ;  and  this  lore 
was  largely  used  in  reconstructing  imaginatively  their 
past.  There  was  a  vast  amount  of  intellectual  activ¬ 
ity  of  which  we  know  little,  save  what  may  be  sur¬ 
mised  from  its  fragments.  But  the  fragments  reveal 
love  of  their  past  and  pride  in  their  achievements. 
Free  from  the  inroads  which  the  nomads  of  the  south 
made  upon  Judah,  the  proud,  sturdy,  self-reliant  men 
of  Ephraim  retained  for  centuries  their  old  manners, 
customs,  and  traditions  in  comparative  purity.2 


1  2  Sam.  xx.  16  if. ;  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  C.,  p.  371  f. 

2  Their  hopefulness  seems  to  have  failed  near  the  close  of  their 
career.  Note  the  character  of  the  E  narrative.  Kautzsch,  Lit.  Old 
Test.,  pp.  44,  45.  Cf.  the  Blessing  of  Moses  which  is  late,  and, 
though  belonging  to  E,  is  fairly  jubilant. 


174  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


"Worldly  goods  were  prized  by  the  Hebrews,  but 
many  were  easily  satisfied.  They  were  content  to 
live  in  a  quiet,  simple  way.  Only  in  the  eighth  cen¬ 
tury,  and  then  only  in  the  larger  cities,  was  luxury 
sought  and  gross  indulgence  considered  a  necessity 
of  life.  The  majority  were  content  to  live  for  the 
most  part  simply  and  abstemiously.  They  had  their 
times  of  feasting  and  debauchery,  but  these  occasions 
were  limited  by  the  circumstances  and  religious  cus¬ 
toms  of  the  people.  That  gluttony  was  not  unknown 
is  evident.  The  occasional  use  of  flesh,  instead  of 
the  common  use  of  it,  would  be  favourable  to  excess 
when  used.  History  makes  it  equally  clear  that 
drunkenness  was  frequently  associated  with  the  feast¬ 
ing.  It  became  in  time  shockingly  common  at  the 
sanctuaries,  as  it  became  a  distinctive  concomitant  of 
wealth  and  social  position.  In  the  earlier  part  of  our 
period  it  was  not  discountenanced.  The  story  of 
Noah’s  drunkenness  conveys  no  suggestion  of  cen¬ 
sure.  That  women  joined  in  such  debauchery  in  the 
earlier  time,  as  did  “  the  wealthy  kine  ”  of  Amos’ 
day,  appears  from  the  narratives,  though  such  con¬ 
duct  can  hardly  have  been  thought  befitting  them. 
After  Hannah  had  eaten  and  drunk,  Eli,  the  priest, 
seeing  her  lips  move  in  silent  prayer,  said  to  her, 
“  How  long  wilt  thou  be  drunken?  put  away  thy 
wine  from  thee.”  He  supposed  her  to  be  drunk.  A 
common  name  for  a  feast  was  a  mashteh  or  drinking 
bout.  One  of  the  things  to  be  laid  to  the  charge  of 
David  is  that  he  purposely,  and  with  evil  intent,  made 
the  sturdy  old  warrior  Uriah  drunk.  But  the  offence 
was  probably  regarded  lightly. 


MANNERS  AND  MORALS 


175 


More  debasing  still  was  the  prostitution  which 
was  unblushingly  practised  at  the  great  sanctuaries 
under  the  guise  of  religion.  Of  this  we  shall  have 
occasion  to  speak  elsewhere.  It  w'as  most  demor¬ 
alising  in  its  effects  upon  the  social  life  of  the  people. 
That  there  was  an  element  which  appears  still  earlier 
living  very  near  the  line  of  criminality  from  which 
the  criminal  classes  were  recruited  is  not  to  be  over¬ 
looked.  It  was  made  up  of  men  and  women  who 
were  known  as  “  worthless.”  Sons  and  daughters  of 
Belial  they  were  called  ;  and  worthless  they  were  if 
they  are  to  be  judged  from  their  shamelessness. 
Utterly  wanting  in  veracity  and  integrity,  they  were 
willing  to  sell  themselves  cheaply  in  almost  any 
market.  There  were  also  those  who  went  about  as 
slanderers.  The  very  verb  which  commonly  means 
to  go  about  (b3fi)  gave  the  Hebrews  the  name  by 
which  these  individuals  were  known.  It  is  very 
likely  that  the  drunkenness  and  lewdness  of  many  of 
the  sanctuaries  led  to  the  multiplication  of  the  latter 
classes. 

Anything  in  the  nature  of  an  abstract  ideal  must 
have  been  far  from  the  thought  of  the  Hebrews ;  yet 
that  they  possessed  unconsciously  an  ideal  we  can 
see  from  a  study  of  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  which 
we  shall  take  occasion  to  examine  carefully  in  our 
next  chapter.  This  code  reveals  the  fact  that  injury 
of  one’s  Hebrew  neighbour  was  not  tolerated,  and 
that  unkindness  to  aliens  and  dependents  was  dis¬ 
couraged.  Violence  in  the  home  was  allowed  to  an 
extent  that  to  us  seems  revolting,  but  there  were 
limits  here  beyond  which  one  could  not  go  with  im- 


170  the  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


punity.  The  reviling  of  Yahweh,  of  the  King,  or  of 
one’s  parents,  was  not  allowed,  while  untruthful 
speech  and  false  witnessing  were  punished.  Altruis¬ 
tic  sentiments  were  not  largely  demanded  by  this 
code,  though  they  received  some  recognition,  while 
in  actual  practice  altruism  had  necessarily  consider¬ 
able  place.  There  was  little  effort  on  the  part  of  the 
Book  of  the  Covenant  to  cultivate  mere  sentiment  in 
any  direction  ;  it  deals  chiefly  in  prohibitions.  One 
might  live  up  to  the  letter  of  the  law  and  yet  be  self¬ 
ish  and  base  at  heart.1  But  if  'the  ideal  thus  pre¬ 
sented  required  little  in  the  way  of  real  heart-culture, 
it  nevertheless  expected  considerable  in  the  way  of 
actual  conduct.  Men  who  were  good  at  heart  prob¬ 
ably  found  little  wanting  in  this  code ;  its  imperfec¬ 
tions  could  not  have  been  felt  much  before  the  days 
of  the  greater  prophets.  Even  then  the  changes 
wrought  in  it  were  largely  in  the  way  of  multiplying 
its  concrete  prohibitions. 

1  Still  the  fact  that  this  code  was  largely  supplementary  of  the 
old  clan  and  city  customs,  regulations,  and  laws,  keeps  us  from 
speaking  too  confidently  of  their  ideals  further  than  to  say  that 
they  had  to  do  largely  with  externals. 


CHAPTER  X 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 

Law  as  law  was  unknown  in  early  Israel.  The 
Hebrew  clans  had  their  customs,  and  the  conduct  of 
individual  members  of  these  clans  was  determined 
by,  or  in  case  of  violation,  judged  in  accordance  with, 
these  customs,  the  freemen  of  the  clan  being  the 
judges.  Penalty  was  as  much  a  matter  of  custom  as 
was  conduct.  The  judges  could  not  impose  arbitrary 
or  unreasonable  punishments  without  endangering 
the  very  life  of  their  clan.  When,  however,  custom 
failed  in  a  specific  case,  judgment  could  be  rendered 
and  new  precedents  might  be  made  which  in  process 
of  time  would  crystallise  into  customs.  To  such  an 
extent  was  life  under  the  domination  of  the  clan  in 
the  time  of  the  vindicators  that  we  hear  little  of  legal 
matters.  It  is  possible,  with  a  good  degree  of  plaus¬ 
ibility,  to  surmise  how  individual  offenders  were  dealt 
with,  but  we  have  few  specific  cases.  When  we  come 
down  to  the  time  of  the  monarchy  we  discover  a 
difference  when  the  King  as  civil  head  and  chief-jus- 
tice  appears  ;  but  we  have  already  seen  that  clan  life 
and  clan  customs  long  survived  alongside  the  mon¬ 
archy.  The  freemen  of  septs  and  of  clans,  and  es¬ 
pecially  the  freemen  of  cities,  had  matters  of  law,  so 
far  at  least  as  local  affairs  were  concerned,  in  their 

177 


178  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


hands.  The  ancient  and  fundamental  law  of  the 
land,  we  must  conclude,  originated  in  the  various 
clans.  What  this  law  was  we  shall  have  occasion  to 
notice  later  ;  it  now  behooves  us  to  look  more  close¬ 
ly  at  other  sources  or  fountains  of  law  than  the  clan, 
for  these  other  sources  came  into  greater  prominence 
as  the  clan  organisation  decreased  in  importance, 
as  it  did  in  the  days  of  the  monarchy. 

To  just  what  extent  kings  contributed  to  the  mak¬ 
ing  of  law  among  the  Hebrews  cannot  be  accurately 
determined,  yet  we  can  discover  by  patient  research 
several  directions  in  which  they  must  have  made 
themselves  powerfully  felt.  That  they  could  place  a 
taboo  in  times  of  war  upon  certain  things,  as  food  or 
the  spoil  of  the  enemy,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
Saul,  the  last  of  the  old  vindicators,  was  able  to  do 
this.  The  violation  of  such  a  taboo  meant  death  to 
the  violator,  unless,  indeed,  as  could  rarely  have  hap¬ 
pened,  the  people  insisted  that  a  substitute  be  found. 
In  this  instance,  though  actuated  very  likely  by 
worthy  motives,  Saul  made  a  questionable  use  of  his 
prerogative,  for  abstinence  from  food  and  drink 
caused  the  people  to  faint  ere  nightfall  and  so  kept 
them  from  pressing  the  flying  foe,  as  it  also  led  to 
such  a  lack  of  restraint  after  sunset  when  they  fell 
upon  the  spoil  of  the  enemy  as  brought  confusion 
upon  them.  Ordinarily  such  a  taboo  might  have 
proved  advantageous,  as  when  making  the  sack  of  a 
town ;  for  such  a  taboo  might  extend  so  far  as  to 
cover  the  slaughter  of  the  innocent  and  the  violation 
of  women.  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  Saul,  in  declar¬ 
ing  the  taboo,  said :  “  Cursed  be  the  man  that  eateth 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


179 


any  food  until  evening.”  It  was  thus  that  a  taboo 
was  declared  by  a  leader  or  king,  and  the  fact  that  a 
curse  hung  over  them,  the  violation  of  which  was  an 
awful  offence  against  Yaliweh,  that  was  to  be  followed 
by  death,  effectually  restrained  the  people.  Such  a 
curse  might  be  made  to  hang  over  those  who  at¬ 
tempted  to  rebuild  a  city  or  to  do  anything  which 
might  militate  against  the  common  good.  In  case  a 
city  failed  to  respond  to  the  call  of  a  general  or  king 
in  time  of  war,  a  curse  might  be  pronounced  against 
the  city.  This  power  to  curse  would  have  a  tendency 
to  effectually  restrain  cities  from  refusing  coopera¬ 
tion,  whatever  the  effects  might  be  upon  those  imme¬ 
diately  concerned.  On  the  other  hand,  the  cursing 
of  an  enemy  might  greatly  hearten  the  forces  of 
Israel  when  going  out  to  battle.  The  extent  to  which 
a  ruler  might  make  use  of  his  power  just  here  is  seen 
in  the  writings  of  the  Deuteronomist,  where  a  curse 
is  pronounced  upon  the  makers  of  graven  or  molten 
images,  upon  him  who  treats  lightly  and  disrespect¬ 
fully  his  parents,  upon  him  who  removes  his  neigh¬ 
bour’s  landmark,  upon  him  who  leadeth  astray  the 
blind,  upon  him  who  perverteth  the  judgment  of  the 
stranger,  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow,  upon  him 
who  committeth  fornication  with  man  or  beast,  upon 
him  who  secretly  smiteth  his  neighbour,  etc.1  So  also 
we  may  see  from  the  Deuteronomist  the  extent  to 
which  an  individual  might  in  the  thought  of  the  time 
be  blasted  by  a  curse.  It  might  be  made  to  follow 
him  into  all  the  ramifications  of  his  life,  social  and  in¬ 
dustrial.  Here  the  Deuteronomist,  though  subse- 


1  Deut.  xxvii.  15-26. 


ISO  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


quent  to  the  period  we  are  considering,  may  be  taken 
as  revealing  how  much  power  a  king  might  have  in 
this  direction.  It  was  probably  thus  rather  than  by 
mere  civil  enactments  and  decrees  that  some  kings 
made  themselves  felt  as  fountains  of  law  and  author¬ 
ity.  The  putting  of  a  city  under  the  ban  so  that  all 
save  such  imperishable  things,  as  silver  and  gold, 
must  be  destroyed  may  here  be  mentioned  as  deter¬ 
mining  the  conduct  of  those  warring  against  a  city. 
Individual  compunctions  and  preferences  were  then 
laid  aside,  even  individual  greed  had  then  to  be  re¬ 
strained.  It  is  probable  that  such  devotement  of 
cities  belongs  to  the  later  time  rather  than  to  the 
earlier,  to  the  time  of  priestly  domination  after  the 
Exile  rather  than  to  the  days  of  the  kings  or  the  vin¬ 
dicators  ;  but  that  it  was  sometimes  employed  by 
both  kings  and  vindicators  we  know. 

In  other  and  more  important  ways  the  King  might 
make  himself  felt  as  a  lawgiver.  He  might  give  spe¬ 
cific  charges  relative  to  the  treatment  of  individuals 
or  to  the  conduct  of  a  campaign  or  the  siege  of  a  city 
that  would  have  only  local  significance;  but  he  might 
also  make  decrees  that  would  long  have  powTer  in  civil 
as  also  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  for  in  religion  he  was 
preeminent.  He  was  recognised  as  priest  and  often 
performed  priestly  functions ;  but  he  also  had  power 
of  determination  in  matters  of  ritual,  in  the  location  of 
sanctuaries,  in  the  appointment  of  priests,  etc.  Isaiah 
may  have  had  unworthy  kings  in  mind  when  he  pro¬ 
nounced  a  woe  against  those  who  decree  unrighteous 
decrees,  as  the  writer  of  Proverbs  must  have  reflected 
the  conditions  which  held  in  the  older,  as  well  as  in 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


181 


his  own  time,  when  he  spoke  of  kings  as  those  who 
reign,  and  of  princes  as  those  who  decree  justice. 
The  King  might  sit  in  the  gate  or  in  judgment 
hall  and  give  judgments  in  cases  brought  to  him 
where  the  fear  of  the  miscarriage  of  justice  in  lower 
tribunals  or  their  incompetence  to  deal  with  the 
cases  led  men  to  look  to  him.  In  so  doing  the  King 
might  make  precedents  that  would  have  binding  force 
for  generations.  As  the  fountain  of  justice  and  the 
supreme  tribunal  the  King  must  have  had  much  to 
do  in  shaping  the  laws  of  the  land.1  To  be  derelict 
here,  as  we  see  in  the  case  of  David,  was  for  a  king 
to  imperil  his  throne,  if  not  his  royal  house.  The 
King  might  fix  the  tribute  of  a  subject  people,  as  he 
might  also  determine  the  amount  and  nature  of  a 
tax  to  be  levied  at  home.  The  extortion  of  Solomon 
in  this  direction  prepared  the  way  for  the  rebellion 
of  the  northern  clans  in  the  days  of  his  son.  Kings 
might  also  make  foreign  treaties  and  determine  for¬ 
eign  relations,  and  so  become  in  a  small  way  foun¬ 
tains  of  commercial  and  international  law.  Finally 
we  may  notice  that  whatever  may  have  been  the 
functions  of  the  freemen  of  clans  and  of  cities  in 
civil  affairs,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  kings  could 
set  in  motion  these  bodies  of  freemen  and  so  influ¬ 
ence  legislation  in  so  far  as  it  belonged  to  them  to 
legislate. 

The  ministers  of  even  the  greater  sanctuaries  could 
have  done  little  in  the  way  of  giving  shape  to  the 
laws  of  their  time.  The  priestly  legislation  belonged 

1  Kittel,  His.  of  the  Hebrews ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  301;  Hastings’  Diction - 
ary,  vol.  ii.,  p.  842. 


182  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


to  the  Jews  of  a  later  day,  the  time  of  and  subse¬ 
quent  to  the  Exile.  In  the  days  preceding  Josiah 
the  priests  wrere  without  organisation.  The  different 
sanctuaries  were  practically  independent  of  one  an¬ 
other,  and  often  apparently  in  rivalry  with  one  an¬ 
other.  As  ministers  of  local  sanctuaries  these  men 
were  not  beyond  serving  the  King  in  humble  ways 
quite  apart  from  their  ordinary  vocation.  Sons  of 
priests,  men  in  years  and  themselves  ministers  of 
local  shrines  or  sanctuaries,  were  not  above  service 
as  spies  or  go-betweens  in  David’s  day ;  and  one  of 
these,  as  we  know,  upon  a  certain  occasion  served  as 
a  messenger,  pitting  himself  in  so  doing  against  a 
negro.  Indeed,  this  man,  Ahimaaz  by  name,  seems 
to  have  had  an  enviable  reputation  as  a  long-distance 
runner.1 

Men  of  Yahweh,  known  to  the  time  subsequent  to 
David  as  prophets,  by  their  oracular  announcements 
determined  in  some  measure  the  laws  under  which 
the  people  were  to  live,  because  they  were  supposed 
to  sustain  a  peculiar  relation  to  Yahweh.  This  may 
have  had  something,  though  not  as  much  as  a  mis¬ 
understanding  as  to  the  place  of  the  priest  in  the 
legislation,  to  do  in  fixing  in  the  minds  of  later  gen¬ 
erations  the  thought  that  the  laws  of  the  Hebrews 
were  the  direct  and  unequivocal  decrees  of  Yahweh 
himself,  when  the  real  facts  were  quite  the  contrary. 
Laws  originated  among  the  Hebrews  as  among  other 
peoples  of  antiquity.2  If  in  any  respects  their  laws 
were  superior,  if  there  were  directions  in  which  there 

1  2  Sam.  xviii.  27. 

*  W.  Robertson  Smith,  0.  T.  in  the  Jewish  Church ,  p.  339  ff. 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


183 


were  marks  of  a  loftier  ethical  character,  we  must 
seek  for  the  causes  thereof  in  the  character  of  the 
people  themselves  and  in  the  nature  of  their  concep¬ 
tions  of  Yahweh. 

When  we  come  to  the  laws  themselves  we  are  in¬ 
terested  to  find  that  the  period  of  the  monarchy  pro¬ 
duced  the  first  formal  legal  code,  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant,1  as  it  was  called.  This  codification  be¬ 
longs,  probably,  to  the  eighth  century.  It  cannot 
have  been  earlier,  though  some  of  its  provisions 
undoubtedly  had  their  roots  in  the  old  clan  life  of  the 
people.  It  is  not  merely  the  fact  that  the  laws  are 
mostly  those  of  an  agricultural  people,  for  Hebrew 
life  was  largely  agricultural  to  the  end,  nor  is  it  that 
there  are  other  marks  of  a  primitive  character  ;  it  is 
rather  the  strong  individualism  of  the  code  that 
guides  us  in  determining  its  date.  Men  are  dealt 
with  as  men,  rather  than  as  but  partially  responsible 
members  of  clans.  It  is  the  individual  who  is  ad¬ 
dressed  in  the  prohibitions  as  it  is  the  individual 
against  whom  the  threatenings  are  directed.  To  this 
law-book  we  must  go  for  laws  of  the  time,  if  not  for 
the  earlier  and  previously  uncodified  laws,  while  for 
a  conception  of  the  penalties  that  followed  upon  the 
infringement  of  these  laws  we  may  study  particular 
cases  as  they  come  up  in  the  history  of  the  period, 
as  we  may  also  go,  as  we  are  bound  to  do,  to  the 
code  itself.  The  one  study  must  supplement  the 
other. 

Among  the  Hebrews  a  considerable  number  of 

1  0.  T.  in  Jewish  Church ,  p.  333  ff.  ;  Kautzsch,  Lit.  0.  T. ,  pp. 
7  f.,  29  ff. ;  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  Ex.*  p.  31  ff. 


184  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBPwEWS 


offences  were  capital  offences.  In  some  cases  death 
was  inevitable,  no  circumstances  could  arise  that 
would  make  it  possible  to  set  free  the  offender ;  in 
other  cases  extenuating  circumstances  were  allowed 
to  intervene,  and  might  lead  to  a  money  payment 
being  accepted,  or  possibly  to  an  acquittal.  The 
blaspheming  of  Yahweh  was  punishable  by  death. 
There  is  a  distinct  prohibition  against  blaspheming 
God  (Ex.  xxii.  28).  The  verb  (bbp)  means  to  make 
light  of  or  revile,  rather  than  curse  or  curse  in  the 
name  of.  This  is  to  be  studied  in  connection  with 
the  third  of  the  Ten  Words:  “  Thou  shalt  not  bear 
(tfTBD)  falsely  (or  to  a  falsehood)  the  name  of  Yahweh, 
thy  Elohim.”  This  prohibition  was  against  swear¬ 
ing  falsely  in  the  name  of  Yahweh,1  and  not  against 
blasphemy.  We  have  put  the  first-named  prohibi¬ 
tion  in  place  of  the  second,  and  that  even  we  have 
misunderstood,  though  not  without  happy  effects 
upon  our  moral  life.  Oaths,  or  swearing  in  the  name 
of  God,  a  common  habit  that  is  justly  thought  rep¬ 
rehensible  to-day,  was  not  uncommon  among  the 
Hebrews.  It  seems  not  to  have  been  condemned. 
Witness  the  oath  with  which  upon  occasion  Joab 
addressed  David  as  typical.2  In  the  case  of  Naboth, 
who  was  unjustly  accused  of  blasphemy,  the  penalty 
inflicted  for  the  supposed  offence  by  the  free  citizens 
of  his  city  was  death.  The  word  for  to  curse  (*pn), 
used  in  the  charge  brought  against  him,  is  unusual  in 

1  Or  Elohim.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant  was  probably  of 
Ephraimite  origin,  as  also  was  the  Decalogue.  Hence  the  frequent 
use  of  Elohim. 

2  2  Sam.  xix.  7. 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


185 


tlie  sense  in  which  it  is  here  employed ;  but  there  is 
no  doubt  as  to  the  nature  of  the  charge. 

The  blaspheming  of  the  King  was  also  punishable 
by  death.  This  was  true  of  the  ruler  whoever  he 
might  be  or  whatsoever  the  name  by  which  he  might 
be  known.  The  term  used  in  the  prohibition  (Ex. 
xxii.  28)  is  “  the  exalted  one  ”  (fcOTUs).  Joab  expected 
Sliimei  to  be  put  to  death  because  he  had  blasphemed 
David,  Yahweh’s  anointed.  A  part  of  Naboth’s  al¬ 
leged  offence  was  that  he  had  blasphemed  the  King, 
Ahab.  The  story  of  the  punishment  of  Miriam,  who 
expostulated  with  Moses,  according  to  the  Epliraim- 
ite  narrative,  because  he  had  married  a  negress,  or 
Cushite,1  should  not  be  overlooked.  Moses  was  the 
civil  head  of  the  people  in  the  thought  of  the  narra¬ 
tor.  So,  too,  the  blaspheming  of  one’s  parents  was 
punishable  by  death.  This  prohibition  (Ex.  xxi.  17) 
should  be  compared  with  the  fifth  of  the  Ten  Words, 
the  command  to  honour  father  and  mother.  The 
smiting  of  one’s  parents  came  in  the  same  category 
as  the  blaspheming  of  them. 

A  sorceress,  one  skilled  in  magic  (tjtDDfi),  must  be  put 
to  death.  This,  very  likely,  was  a  late  requirement. 
It  accords  Avith  Deuteronomy  (xviii.  10).  It  is  not 
out  of  harmony  Avith  the  story  of  the  Avitch  of  Endor, 
which,  as  we  have  it,  may  be  late.  During  the  greater 
part  of  our  period  divination  and  sorcery  must  have 
been  practised  A\dthout  let  or  hindrance.  The  same 
may  be  said  of  the  prohibition  of  the  worship  of 

1  The  probability  that  the  Cushites  were  not  of  negro  blood  is  as¬ 
serted  by  some  of  our  leading  Old  Testament  students. — Cheyne 
and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib \Tol.  i.,  c.  967  f. 


180  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


other  gods,  the  infringement  of  which,  was  to  be  fol¬ 
lowed  by  the  death  -  penalty.  Fornication  with  a 
beast  brought  upon  the  guilty  party,  if  detected, 
death.  The  stealing  of  a  Hebrew  and  the  selling  of 
him  into  slavery,  an  offence,  it  is  to  be  feared,  that 
was  exceedingly  common  in  some  parts  of  the  land, 
was  a  capital  crime.  Manslaughter  was  punishable 
by  death.  There  is  a  distinct  statement  that  may  be 
compared  with  the  sixth  of  the  Ten  Words.  A  pre¬ 
meditated  attempt  to  slay  a  neighbour  was  to  receive 
the  death-penalty.  Where  men  contended  with  one 
another  and  one  injured  the  other  with  fist  or  stone, 
he  must  make  amends  by  a  money  payment  for  the 
time  lost.  Presumably  if  the  injury  resulted  in  death, 
he  must  suffer  death.  If  in  such  contention  a  woman 
with  child  was  injured,  a  fine  was  to  be  imposed.  In 
case  death  ensued,  the  penalty  was  to  be  death.  In 
all  cases  of  injury  of  man  by  man  the  recompense 
was  to  be  according  to  the  injury  inflicted  :  eye  for 
eye,  tooth  for  tooth,  etc.,  with  the  privilege  of  money 
payment  where  the  injured  party  could  be  induced 
to  consent  to  such  reparation. 

Specific  fines  were  imposed  in  cases  of  theft,  as 
five  steers  for  a  steer,  four  sheep  for  a  sheep.  He 
who  killed  a  thief  in  the  act  of  thieving  at  night  was 
acquitted  ;  but  he  who  killed  one  by  day  must  make 
some  recompense.  Where  property  left  in  the  hands 
of  another  was  stolen  or  lost,  it  was  to  be  made  good. 
Borrowers  were  to  make  good  the  property  borrowed 
if  lost  or  injured.  This  law  probably  accounts  for 
the  painful  exclamation  of  the  poor  man  who  lost  the 
axe  in  the  water :  “  Alas,  master !  for  it  was  bor- 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


187 


rowed.”  Too  poor  to  own  an  axe,  he  was  too  poor 
to  pay  for  a  borrowed  one  that  he  had  lost.  The 
story  of  the  miracle  reveals  this  as  it  does  also  the 
fact  that  the  prophets  of  those  times  were  minutely 
interested  in  the  social  well-being  of  the  people.  A 
man  setting  a  fire  was  responsible  for  any  loss  it 
might  occasion  if  it  spread  into  a  neighbour’s  field. 
In  questions  of  dispute  over  trespass  or  over  lost 
beasts  or  merchandise,  the  litigants  were  to  appear 
before  God  at  the  local  sanctuary,  where,  in  some 
way,  apparently  by  lot,  the  case  was  to  be  decided, 
and  the  one  declared  guilty  was  to  double  to  his 
neighbour  his  loss.  We  have  here,  perhaps,  some¬ 
thing  akin  to  the  old  ordeal  by  fire  or  water  in  which 
the  securing  of  justice  was  a  very  precarious  matter. 
Where  money  was  loaned  to  a  fellow-Hebrew,  inter¬ 
est  was  not  to  be  exacted.  This  statute,  it  is  to  bo 
feared,  was  frequently  violated.  The  fact  that  no 
penalty  was  affixed  may  partly  account  for  its  vio¬ 
lation.  Where  garments  were  taken  in  pledge,  they 
were  to  be  returned  at  nightfall.  A  stranger  must 
not  be  oppressed.  The  sacred  laws  of  hospitality 
were  to  hold. 

The  seventh  of  the  Ten  Words  prohibits  adultery. 
The  code  provides  that  in  case  a  virgin  was  enticed, 
marriage  was  to  follow  and  the  usual  dowry  was  to 
be  paid  the  father  of  the  girl,  unless  he  forbade  mar¬ 
riage,  in  which  case  the  dowry  was  still  to  be  paid, 
according  to  the  dowry  of  virgins  at  the  time,  that  is, 
virtually  according  to  their  price.  The  fixing  of  a 
definite  sum,  50  shekels,  in  Deuteronomy  belonged 
to  a  later  day. 


188  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


The  laws  in  regard  to  veracity  deserve  considera¬ 
tion.  The  malicious  circulating  of  a  false  report  was 
forbidden,  likewise  the  leaguing  of  one’s  self  with 
an  unrighteous  witness.  All  forms  of  misleading 
the  people  and  of  the  wresting  of  judgment  were  in¬ 
cluded.  The  poor  were  not  to  have  justice  denied 
them,  and  judges  were  not  to  receive  gifts. 

There  were  laws  which  had  to  do  with  concubin¬ 
age  and  slavery.  A  Hebrew  woman  might,  under 
circumstances  not  uncommon  in  those  times,  become 
the  handmaid,  that  is,  the  slave  of  a  Hebrew,  as 
where  a  father,  perhaps  because  of  poverty,  elected 
to  sell  his  daughter.  A  slave  thus  acquired  was 
usually  supposed  to  become  the  concubine  of  her 
master;  at  all  events  she  might  be  made  a  concu¬ 
bine  and  rear  children  to  him ;  but  if  the  master 
were  not  pleased  to  retain  her  in  this  relation,  he 
was  to  allow  her  to  be  redeemed.  He  could  not  sell 
her  to  a  foreign  people.  Apparently  he  might,  if 
she  were  not  redeemed,  sell  her  at  home.1  He  might 
give  her  to  his  son  to  wife.  In  this  case  he  was  to 
treat  her  as  a  daughter  rather  than  as  the  concubine 
of  his  son.  Even  in  case  he  kept  her  for  himself  he 
was  not  to  curtail  her  food  and  clothing.  The  men¬ 
tion  of  these  suggests  the  interesting  fact  that,  as  in 
the  old  nomadic  time  each  wife  had  her  tent,  so  later, 
when  settled,  the  Hebrew  husband  either  put  a  sep¬ 
arate  establishment  at  the  disposal  of  each  wife,  or 
gave  each,  as  was  probably  more  customary,  separate 
apartments  in  his  own  house. 

A  Hebrew  man  might  be  bought  as  a  slave,  but 

1  Under  certain  circumstances  she  was  to  be  set  free. 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


189 


after  six  years  of  servitude  he  was  entitled  to 
freedom.  If  married  when  he  entered  the  man’s 
service,  his  wife  and  children  were  to  be  freed  with 
him.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  he  chanced  to  have 
a  wife  which  his  master  had.  given  him,  he  must, 
though  the  wife  may  have  borne  him  children,  go 
out  alone.  The  wife  and  children  were  the  master’s. 
Where  the  slave  was  attached  to  his  family  and  his 
master,  and  preferred  to  remain  in  servitude,  he  might 
become  a  bondman  for  life  ;  but  not  until  he  had 
been  taken  to  a  local  sanctuary  and  had  had  his  ear 
pierced  with  an  awl  by  the  minister,  not  so  much  to 
mark  him  as  a  bondman  as  to  symbolise  his  perpet¬ 
ual,  voluntary  devotement  of  himself  to  his  master. 
Ordinary  slaves,  especially  those  other  than  Hebrew, 
have  little  attention  given  them  in  the  early  legisla¬ 
tion  that  has  come  down  to  us.  That  such  a  slave 
might  be  beaten  or  otherwise  severely  dealt  with,  if 
the  master  did  not  kill  him  outright,  is  evident.  In 
the  sight  of  the  law  he  had  but  injured  his  own  prop¬ 
erty  ;  yet  if  the  master  put  out  an  eye  or  knocked 
out  a  tooth  he  must  free  his  servant.  In  case  he 
killed  his  slave  he  was  to  be  punished ;  how,  we  do 
not  know.  Probably  some  fine  was  imposed  by  clan 
or  city. 

A  man  was  held  responsible  for  any  injury  which 
a  beast  of  his  might  do.  If  a  bull  or  steer  killed 
a  man,  the  beast  alone  must  be  killed ;  unless,  in¬ 
deed,  the  owner  was  aware  beforehand  that  it  was  a 
dangerous  animal,  in  which  case  the  owner  and 
beast  must  both  die ;  though  there  might  be  here, 
as  was  probably  the  case  earlier  of  all  deaths  by 


190  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


violence,  a  blood-wite,  according  to  tlie  station  of 
the  individual  killed.  In  the  case  of  a  slave  being 
so  killed,  a  fixed  fine  of  30  shekels  was  imposed. 
Where  the  beast  of  another  fell  into  a  pit  carelessly 
left  open  and  was  killed,  the  owner  received  full  com¬ 
pensation  on  the  ground  of  criminal  neglect.  Sim¬ 
ilarly,  if  one  man’s  beast  killed  another  man’s  beast, 
there  must  be  recompense.  Where  a  vineyard  or 
field  was  injured  by  a  neighbour’s  beast,  the  owner 
must  make  restitution.  A  stray  beast,  if  found, 
must  be  returned  to  its  owner.  Where  an  ass  had 
sunk  under  its  load,  its  owner,  if  one  chanced  upon 
him,  must  be  helped.1 

Other  laws  of  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  were  of  a 
ritualistic  character.  The  law  concerning  the  first¬ 
born  of  man  was  certainly,  and  that  concerning  the 
first-born  of  beasts  and  the  first-fruits  was,  in  all 
probability,  much  older  than  the  code  of  which  it 
formed  a  part.  According  to  this  law  these  belonged 
to  God,  but  the  first-born  of  man  and  beast  might  be 
redeemed.  We  have  a  reflection  of  this  law  in  the 
story  of  the  attempt  to  offer  Isaac,  and  in  the  stories 
of  the  devotion  of  Samson  and  Samuel,  the  first  as  a 
Nazarite,  the  second  as  an  attendant  at  the  sanctuary 
of  Shiloh.  The  hebdomadal  division  of  time  appears 
in  the  requirement  of  a  weekly  day  of  rest.  Whether 
the  provision  for  a  seventh  year  of  rest  belongs  to  the 

1  The  incomplete  character  of  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  as  a 
codification  of  the  laws  of  the  Hebrews  of  the  time  is  seen  if  we 
stop  to  reflect  that  it  is  silent  upon  many  important  matters,  as,  for 
example,  the  holding  and  conveyance  of  real  estate,  the  status  of 
free  citizens,  etc. 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


191 


Deuteronomist  we  cannot  say  positively.  It  looks 
like  some  of  his  well-known  legislation,  much  of  which 
was  of  an  impracticable  character.  The  law  in  regard 
to  feasts  has  certainly  been  worked  over  by  the  Deu¬ 
teronomist.  It  is  in  his  style  and  agrees  substan¬ 
tially  with  his  requirements.  So  far  as  we  are  able 
to  determine  from  the  actual  records  of  the  time,  but 
one  great  annual  feast  was  observed  during  the 
period.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant  prescribes  an 
altar  of  earth ;  though  it  permits  the  use  of  one  built 
of  unhewn  stones.  The  early  altars,  which  we  en¬ 
counter  in  the  literature,  were  great  stones.  The 
only  reference  to  earth  being  used  for  the  purpose  in 
actual  history  is  in  the  story  of  Naaman,  who  begs 
for  two  mules’  burden  of  earth,  that  he  may  worship 
Yahweh  on  his  own  soil.  This  did  not  forbid  the 
erection  of  a  stone  altar  upon  this  earth.  Offerings 
were  to  be  of  two  kinds,  burnt  offerings  and  peace 
offerings,  which  appear  to  have  been  apart  from  the 
regular  and  invariable  offering  of  the  blood  and  the 
fat.  This  accords  with  the  chronicles  of  those  times. 
The  prohibition  of  torn  flesh  as  food  was  in  agree¬ 
ment  with  ancient  Semitic  thought.  It  is  not  that 
the  torn  flesh  is  holy,  for  it  is  to  be  cast  to  the  dogs. 
It  is  because  they  who  eat  flesh  are  Yahweh’s  people, 
and  because  only  flesh  of  beasts  which  have  been 
properly  bled  in  the  killing,  can  be  eaten.  Unless 
the  blood  has  been  poured  out  and  the  fat  has  been 
burnt,  it  is  unfit  for  food.  The  prohibition  of  image¬ 
making  and  idolatry  was  certainly  late,  though  not 
necessarily  as  late  as  the  Deuteronomist,  for  we  find 
in  the  prophets  of  the  eighth  century  the  strongest 


192  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


condemnation  of  all  worship  of  other  gods  and  of  all 
forms  of  image-worship.  The  prohibition  against 
covetousness,  on  the  other  hand,  is  very  likely  much 
later  than  the  Deuteronomist.  It  is  certainly  too 
abstract  a  conception  to  have  had  a  place  in  the 
original  of  such  a  concrete  law-book  as  the  Book  of 
the  Covenant. 

In  capital  offences  death  was  by  stoning.  Con¬ 
demned  men  were  taken  outside  the  village  or  city 
and  stoned  by  men  delegated  to  do  so.  Where  the 
crime  was  murder  or  manslaughter  the  immediate 
friends  of  the  dead  were  allowed  to  take  part  in  the 
execution.  Naboth  was  put  to  death  by  stoning  as 
one  who  had  committed  a  capital  offence.  “Then 
they  carried  him  forth  out  of  the  city,  and  stoned 
him  with  stones,  that  he  died.”  Tamar,  who  had 
played  the  harlot,  according  to  a  story  of  the  time, 
barely  escaped  death  by  stoning.  In  real  life  her 
chances  of  escape  would  have  been  small.  In  a  story 
of  a  later  day  a  man  who  had  broken  the  Sabbath 
during  the  wanderings  in  the  wilderness  was  stoned 
to  death.  Even  where  enraged  people  took  the  law 
into  their  own  hands,  this  was  the  method  of  lynch¬ 
ing.  Thus  did  David  come  near  ending  his  life  at 
the  hands  of  his  men,  when  he  left  his  encamp¬ 
ment  at  Ziklag  unguarded,  and  the  Amalekites 
spoiled  it  and  carried  off  all  the  women  and  children, 
together  with  all  the  personal  property.  So,  also, 
according  to  the  E  narrative,  the  two  spies,  Joshua 
and  Caleb,  narrowly  escaped  being  made  way  with. 
Throughout  the  period  capital  offences  when  left  to 
the  freemen  of  clan  or  city  were  atoned  for  in  this 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


193 


barbarous  fashion ;  but  when  kings  wished  to  make 
way  with  those  whom-  they  adjudged  worthy  of 
death,  they  despatched  them  quickly  by  some  mem¬ 
ber  of  their  bodyguard,  to  whom  the  office  of  exe¬ 
cutioner  was  probably  assigned.  The  violators  of 
covenants,  which,  being  mutual  agreements,  were 
looked  upon  as  possessed  of  legal  character,  were 
differently  disposed  of  because  of  the  covenant  oath, 
the  breaking  of  which  was  an  offence  against  Yah- 
weh,  the  God  of  the  covenant.  As  we  see  in  the 
story  of  Rizpah,1  according  to  which  two  sons  and 
five  grandsons  of  Saul  were  put  to  death  by  the 
Gibeonites,  covenant  breakers  were  slain  and  ex¬ 
posed  before  Yahweh,  who  ma}^  here  have  been  iden¬ 
tified  with  the  sun.  The  bodies  of  these  seven  men 
were  left  suspended,  until  the  flesh  had  dried  away 
from  their  bones,  upon  the  side  of  a  great  cliff  or 
rock,  upon  which,  because  of  its  supposed  sacred 
character,  they  had  been  sacrificed  to  Yahweh. 
Kizpah’s  sacred,  self-imposed  duty  was  to  remain 
upon  the  top  of  the  rock  and  keep  away  by  night  and 
by  day,  birds  and  beasts  of  prey  from  the  exposed 
bodies  that  in  due  time  what  remained  might  be 
buried. 

In  capital  offences  men  were  not  condemned  with¬ 
out  two  or  more  witnesses,  and  inasmuch  as  the 
freemen  of  clans  or  of  cities  were  the  judges,  the 
condemnation  and  execution  of  an  innocent  man 
must  have  been  of  rare  occurrence.  Only  when  a 
ruler  like  Aliab  was  determined  the  supposed  of- 

1  2  Sam.  xxi.  1  ff. ;  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  (7.,  p.  374  ff.  Cf.  Num. 
xxv.  4. 


194  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


fender  should  suffer  could  worthless  men  be  put 
forward  as  witnesses  with  any  reasonable  hope  of 
securing  condemnation,  unless  the  party  against 
whom  the  charge  was  lodged  was  guilty.  The  guilt 
of  Naboth’s  death  belonged  quite  as  much  to  his 
judges,  who  knew  the  character  of  the  witnesses 
brought  before  them  and  the  reputation  of  Naboth 
himself  for  probity,  as  to  Ahab  and  Jezebel. 

The  various  sanctuaries  and  altars  of  the  land  were 
places  of  asylum  whither  the  criminal,  real  or  sup¬ 
posed,  might  flee  for  refuge.  Adonijah  took  refuge 
in  the  House  of  Yahweh  in  Jerusalem  after  his  at¬ 
tempt  to  seize  the  throne  had  been  foiled.  The 
lateness  of  the  story  accounts  for  some  of  its  features 
as  it  now  stands,  but  in  the  main  it  is  characteristic 
of  the  time.  Any  sanctuary  of  the  land  might  be  so 
used ;  as  Dr.  Bacon  says :  “  The  right  of  asylum 

was  originally  connected  in  Israel,  as  among  other 
ancient  peoples,  with  sanctuary  and  altar.”1  We, 
therefore,  are  not  surprised  that  we  find  no  trace  of 
cities  of  refuge  in  the  indubitable  historical  docu¬ 
ments  of  the  time.  Of  jails  or  prisons  there  could 
have  been  few,  for  most  serious  offences  were  capital 
offences.  Men  who  were  really  guilty  were  put  to 
death,  and  that,  too,  with  the  same  despatch  with 
which  they  buried  a  corpse,  instead  of  being  incar¬ 
cerated.  Kings  appear  to  have  had  prisons,  or 
houses  of  guard ;  but  they  were  probably  ordinary 
buildings  devoted  temporarily  to  the  purpose.  Tow¬ 
ard  the  close  of  the  period  something  in  the  nature 
of  dungeons  or  pits  used  as  places  of  confinement  is 

1  Triple  Tradition  of  the  Exodus ,  p.  117,  note. 


LAWS  AND  THEIR  INFRINGEMENT 


195 


mentioned.  Such  must  have  been  at  the  best  vile 
places.  Similarly  in  villages  and  cities  such  houses 
or  pits  might  upon  occasion  be  temporarily  used  as 
houses  of  detention  ;  but  the  chief  dependence  must 
necessarily  have  been  the  men  left  to  guard  the 
prisoners. 

On  the  whole,  we  are  forced  to  conclude  that  justice 
was  more  secure  among  the  Hebrews  of  this  period 
than  in  England  in  the  days  of  King  John  or  even  in 
the  time  of  Elizabeth.  Here,  as  in  many  other  direc¬ 
tions,  the  civilisation  of  the  Hebrews,  imperfect  as  it 
must  have  been,  was  superior  in  many  respects  to 
that  of  England  in  the  tenth  and  even  in  the  twelfth 
century  of  our  Christian  era.  The  indebtedness  of 
Europe  to  Semitic  Asia  has  been  great ;  but  the  slow¬ 
ness  with  which  the  ancient  West  availed  itself  of  the 
superior  civilisation  of  the  ancient  East  is  matter  for 
wonder  though  easily  explainable. 


CHAPTER  XI 


SICKNESS  AND  DEATH 

The  land  upon  which  the  Hebrews  lived  had  its 
convulsions  of  nature  as  it  also  had  its  catastrophes 
and  afflictions  of  a  milder  sort.  Most  of  these  in¬ 
directly,  if  not  directly,  entailed  loss  of  life.  De¬ 
structive  earthquakes,  however,  were  infrequent,  yet 
seismic  convulsions  were  known  to  have  occurred  at 
long  intervals  which  brought  death  to  the  inhabitants 
and  caused  great  damage  to  property.1  An  earthquake 
of  sufficient  destructiveness  to  give  its  name  to  an 
age,  so  that  it  formed  a  point  of  departure  in  fixing 
the  date  of  an  incident,  as  was  the  case  in  Amos’  day, 
should  here  be  mentioned.  He  tells  us  he  had  his  vi¬ 
sions  “  two  years  before  the  earthquake.”  This  same 
convulsion  of  nature  appears  to  have  been  alluded  to 
by  other  prophets.  It  occurred  in  the  reign  of  Uz- 
ziah  and  made  a  great  impression  upon  the  genera¬ 
tion  to  which  Amos  belonged,  and  was  apparently 
remembered  long  afterward.  Farther  on  in  his 
prophesies  Amos,  it  is  thought,  alludes  to  it  when  he 
says:  “I  have  overthrown  some  among  you,  as  when 
God  overthrew  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  ye  were  as 
a  brand  plucked  out  of  the  burning.”  A  leading 
biblical  scholar  is  probably  not  far  out  of  the  way  in 

’Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  i.,  p.  634. 

196 


SICKNESS  AND  DEATH 


197 


thinking  he  can  discover  in  the  third  division  of  this 
prophet’s  book,  “  A  constant  sense  of  instability,  of 
the  liftableness  and  breakableness  of  the  very  ground 
of  life.” 1  Surely  such  an  affliction  would  at  the  least 
furnish  a  man  with  Amos’  sensitiveness  to  nature 
the  basal  part  of  his  imagery  as  a  prophet  of  doom. 
The  common  name  for  an  earthquake,  “a  shake,”  is 
of  such  a  character  as  to  render  it  difficult  to  decide 
always  when  a  writer  had  the  more  violent  pheno¬ 
mena  of  nature  in  mind  ;  but  that  some  do  refer  to 
these  in  using  the  term  is  extremely  probable  in  cer¬ 
tain  instances  and  indubitable  in  others.  Still  it  is 
not  the  frequency  of  these  earthquakes  and  the  loss 
entailed  by  them  that  are  to  be  noticed  so  much  as 
the  effects  upon  life  in  the  way  of  unsettling  it. 

Other  calamities,  as  famine  and  pestilence,  were 
more  frequent  and  were  vastly  more  destructive  of 
life.  Locusts  and  caterpillars,  blasting  and  mildew, 
when  prevalent  may  not  have  destroyed  crops  to  so 
great  an  extent  as  to  lead  to  prolonged  or  widespread 
want,  but  there  wrere  seasons  of  drought  so  continu¬ 
ous  at  times  that  famine  inevitably  followed.  When 
this  happened,  many  of  the  poorer  classes  were  car¬ 
ried  off,  forced  as  they  were  ordinarily  to  live  upon 
the  verge  of  starvation  in  their  struggle  for  the  means 
of  subsistence.  No  affliction  is  more  frequently  men¬ 
tioned.  That  the  J  and  E  narratives  in  Genesis  both 
speak  of  famine  is  significant.  These  things  are  not 
talked  about  if  they  do  not  occur.  There  was,  we 
read,  a  famine  in  the  days  of  David.  While  ques¬ 
tioning  the  statement,  which  at  best  represented  the 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Twelve  Prophets ,  vol.  i.,  p.  68. 


198  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ordinary  opinion  as  to  its  cause,  in  this  instance,  we 
yet  conclude  that  then  and  at  other  times  the  land 
was  probably  so  afflicted.  Inasmuch  as  such  calam¬ 
ities  never  seemed  far  away  to  the  mass  of  the  people 
who  lived  in  constant  dread  of  them,  they  should  not 
be  overlooked  by  the  student  of  their  social  life.  By 
producing  a  sense  of  uncertainty  and  insecurity,  and 
by  leading  men  to  conclude  that  their  God  was  un¬ 
kindly  disposed,  they  unsettled  life  to  an  alarming 
extent. 

Even  worse  in  their  destructiveness  and  in  their 
effects  upon  society  were  the  awful  plagues  which  in 
those  times  devastated  the  East.  The  maritime  re¬ 
gions  and  the  lowlands  must  always  have  suffered 
more  than  the  comparatively  salubrious  highlands 
where  the  Hebrews  dwelt ;  yet  such  was  the  nature 
of  some  of  these  plagues  that  they  must  have  often 
reached  the  liill-folk.  In  our  endeavour  to  under¬ 
stand  these  afflictions  we  get  little  help  in  an  etymo¬ 
logical  way.  The  Hebrew  terms  used  convey  gener¬ 
ally  the  thought  of  smiting,  thus  leaving  us  after  a 
careful  study  of  them  very  much  in  doubt  as  to  their 
peculiar  character.  There  is,  however,  one  term  that 
has,  not  without  reason,  been  thought  to  refer  to  the 
bubonic  plague  that  should  be  specially  noticed.  The 
word  swellings  (□‘'bfiS)  occurs  in  1  Samuel  v.  6  ff.,  and 
in  Deut.  xxviii.  27.  It  is  probable  that  the  story  of 
the  capture  of  the  Ark  by  the  Philistines,  the  plague 
its  retention  brought  upon  them  and  the  measures 
devised  for  its  return,  belongs  to  the  old  Ephraimite 
narrative  of  the  seventh  century ;  though  it  is  not 
unreasonable  to  suppose  that  there  may  have  been 


SICKNESS  AND  DEATH 


199 


some  traditional  basis  for  the  story.  There  is  noth¬ 
ing  intrinsically  improbable  in  the  thought  that  the 
Philistines  may  at  some  time  have  taken  the  Ark  of 
Yah  well,  or  that,  if  a  pestilence  came  upon  them 
while  they  had  the  Ark  in  their  hands,  they,  as  well 
as  the  Hebrews,  would  naturally  connect  the  two  in 
thought.  What,  however,  we  are  specially  concerned  to 
notice  is  that  the  writers  of  E  and  the  Deuteronomist, 
not  far  from  the  close  of  our  period,  were  conversant 
with  a  plague,  which,  as  described  by  them,  answers 
to  the  fatal  bubonic  plague.  As  H.  P.  Smith  says  : 
“We  can  hardly  go  astray  in  seeing  a  description  of 
the  bubonic  plague.”  1  And  just  here  we  may  no¬ 
tice  the  fact  that  the  people  of  the  East  have  long 
known  that  rodents  carry  this  plague  may  have  to  do 
with  the  introduction  of  the  rodents,  mice  or  more 
probably  rats,  in  the  narrative,  and  the  story  of 
the  offering  of  the  images  of  them  in  gold.2  They 
propitiated  Yahweh  by  an  offering  of  five  images  of 
the  swellings  and  of  five  images  of  the  known  dis¬ 
seminators  of  the  plague.  The  fact  of  redactional 
changes  in,  or  of  additions  to,  the  text  here  means 
simply  that  writers  later  than  E  knew  more  of  the 
special  kind  of  plague  described  and  of  its  causes 
than  he  did.  This  may  be  true  of  each  redactional 
note,  even  the  late  mention  of  “ships”  in  the  Septu- 
agint,  because  it  is  by  means  of  ships  that  wharf-rats 
find  their  way  from  country  to  country. 

1  H.  P.  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  C .,  p.  40. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  43  ;  cf.  here  Hitzig  and  Wellhausen.  See  also  Crook- 
shank,  Bacteriology  and  Infective  Diseases ,  4th  ed.,  1896,  p.  252  ; 
E.  H.  Hankin,  Ann.  de  l’ Inst.  Pasteur ,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  387. 


200  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Afflictions  of  this  nature,  even  where  they  did  not 
reach  the  hill-folk  to  any  extent,  would  greatly  un¬ 
settle  life,  loosening  the  very  bonds  of  society.  More 
even  than  now  would  they  do  so ;  and  in  these  days  a 
plague  is  greatly  dreaded  in  the  Orient  by  those  inter¬ 
ested  in  social  betterment.  Sometimes  there  would 
be  greater  dismay  because  the  high  places  at  which 
the  people  worshipped  proved  breeding-places  and 
centres  for  the  dissemination  of  the  most  destructive 
diseases  and  plagues.  To  feel  that  their  God  was 
showing  himself  to  be  treacherous,  that  just  in  pro¬ 
portion  as  they  remembered  him  they  were  brought 
to  confusion,  would  prove  peculiarly  perplexing  and 
unsettling  in  its  effects  upon  life.  With  their  “  de¬ 
voted  women  ”  and  their  fearful  excesses  these  high 
places  were  so  shameful  that  we  would  fain  hesitate 
to  speak  of  them.  We  can  only  throw  out  the  sug¬ 
gestion  that  here  life  was  morally  contaminated,  as  it 
was  also  to  a  considerable  extent  unsettled  socially. 

Of  the  various  forms  of  sickness  and  disease  with 
which  individuals  were  afflicted  we  cannot  speak  at 
any  length,  for  nothing  like  a  careful  study  of  symp¬ 
toms  was  then  made  among  the  Hebrews,  and  naught 
save  the  rudest  efforts  at  classification  attempted. 
Occasionally  we  get  a  hint  that  enables  us,  with  a 
good  degree  of  plausibility,  to  surmise  what  the  sick¬ 
ness  afflicting  some  individual  was.  We  read  of 
Ahijali,  the  keeper  of  the  sanctuary  at  Shiloh,  that 
his  eyes  were  set  or  fixed  by  reason  of  age.  There  is 
a  similar  statement  concerning  an  earlier  keeper  of 
the  same  sanctuary ;  but  this  is  rejected  as  a  gloss 
by  textual  critics.  We  may  not  unreasonably  speak 


SICKNESS  AND  DEATH 


201 


of  this  particular  malady  as  cataract ;  this  leaves 
the  eyes  fixed  or  set.  For  such  an  affliction,  even  in 
its  earlier  stages,  they  could  have  had  no  remedy. 
We  may  think  of  the  son  of  the  Shunammite  as  being 
prostrated  by  the  heat.  The  boy  went  out  with  his 
father  among  the  reapers  only  to  fall  later  as  the 
heat  increased  with  theory,  “My  head;  my  head!” 
Soon  after,  he  died.1  So  terrific  was  the  heat  often 
at  midday  as  to  force  men  engaged  in  battle  to  de¬ 
sist.  Where  men  kept  up  violent  exercise  they  must 
frequently  have  suffered  from  prostration.  Fevers 
were  common,  and  for  them  they  had  their  term 
expressive  of  heat  or  burning.  In  a  petulant  fit 
David,  exasperated  against  Joab  because  of  his  per¬ 
fidy,  names  the  catalogue  of  diseases  and  other 
maladies  which  he  would  have  come  upon  his  kins¬ 
man  and  his  house.  Among  these  he  names  leprosy 
and  an  issue,  the  latter  probably  an  unnamable  dis¬ 
ease  growing  out  of  gross  sexual  indulgence.  It 
may,  however,  have  been  a  case  of  bleeding  piles. 
Nabal’s  death  was  in  the  nature  of  apoplexy.  In¬ 
sanity  seems  not  to  have  been  uncommon.  Saul  was 
afflicted  with  melancholia.  David  saved  himself 
upon  occasion  by  impersonating  a  madman  as  one 
perfectly  conversant  with  demented  persons  ;  while 
Achish  of  Gath  revealed  by  his  remark,  which  pre¬ 
sumably  was  not  humorous,  that  all  too  many  of  his 
own  people  were  similarly  smitten. 

Among  the  Hebrews  there  was  the  suffering 
caused  by  protracted  sieges,  when  the  people  of 
these  cities  were  reduced  to  the  point  of  devour- 

1  2  Kings  iv.  18  ff. 


202  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ing  such  animals  as  the  wretched  dogs  which  in¬ 
fested  them  as  scavengers,  and  even  their  own  off¬ 
spring.  These  were  things  that  bestialised  life  and 
took  out  of  it,  with  sad  frequency,  its  finer  strands. 
We  almost  wonder  that  society  in  those  days  had 
recuperative  power  enough  to  rally  from  the  effects 
of  its  grosser  and  more  demoralising  indulgences 
and  afflictions. 

The  sparseness  of  the  population  throughout  the 
land  accounts  for  the  prevalence  of  wild  beasts.  That 
they  were  common  in  those  days  as  they  are  in  India 
to-day,  and  that  death  was  not  infrequently  to  be 
charged  to  a  lion,  a  bear,  a  wolf,  or  a  serpent,  we 
know.  Few  regions  were  rid  of  these  pests.  The 
fear  of  them  was  well  nigh  universal.  To  protect 
the  flock  from  the  lion  and  the  bear  was  part  of  the 
duty  of  the  shepherd.  The  appropriate  epitaph  of 
many  might  have  been  the  well-worn  phrase,  “  a  lion 
met  him  in  the  way.”  Perhaps  the  best  thing  said 
of  any  one  of  David’s  big  fighting  men,  and  he  had 
thirty  or  more  who  specially  distinguished  them¬ 
selves,  was  that  concerning  Benaiah  ben  Jehoiada, 
who  was  wont  to  track  lions  through  the  snow  to 
their  lairs  and  slay  them.1 

Here  again  we  are  interested  to  note  the  social 
effects  of  the  maladies  with  which  men  were  afflicted. 
The  people  of  those  times  were  not  without  doctors, 
for  we  read  of  the  rdphe’im,  or  healers,  as  they  were 
called  ;  but  it  is  unlikely  that  these  men  were  skilled 
or  that  they  were  familiar  with  any  remedies  which 
were  not  generally  known  to  housewives.  They 

1  2  Sam.  xxiii.  20. 


SICKNESS  AND  DEATH 


203 


were  little  better  tlian  the  medicine  man  among  our 
American  Indians.  It  is  probable  that  jfchey  were 
not  always  called  in  when  within  reach.  \  In  case  of 
sickness  it  seems  to  have  been  quite  generally  cus¬ 
tomary  to  leave  the  unfortunate  one  to  suffer  while 
the  head  of  the  family  hied  him  to  some  sanctuary  of 
repute  with  an  offering  and  the  query  whether  the 
sick  should  recover.  The  keeper  of  the  shrine  would 
determine  by  sacred  lot,  and  if  a  negative  reply  were 
given,  what  folly  to  attempt  to  do  anything  for  the 
patient.  If  he  had  not  died  he  must  die,  for  it  was 
so  determined.  If  he  were  certain  to  recover 
there  was  no  occasion  for  anxiety.  In  the  search 
for  knowledge  of  the  outcome  of  a  particular  case  of 
sickness  a  royal  patient  might  send  abroad  to  the 
temple  of  a  foreign  god,  though  perhaps  not  until 
the  resources  of  some  local  Yah  well  shrine  had  been 
exhausted.  Among  a  people  to  whom  such  maladies 
as  came  upon  them  and  their  friends  were  evidence 
of  divine  displeasure,  there  was  little  to  do  save  to 
attempt  to  remove  that  displeasureJj  Yet  they  were 
not  utterly  without  nurses  to  care'  for  the  sick,  but 
these,  as  the  terms  used  suggest,  were  usually  em¬ 
ployed  in  the  care  of  mothers  at  childbirth  and  of 
the  children  in  the  home.  The  well  nigh  omnipres¬ 
ent  female  slave  was  usually  available  and  must  not 
infrequently  have  been  possessed  of  considerable 
skill  in  caring  for  the  sick.  Ignorance  of  dietary 
rules  is  shown  by  the  kind  of  food  sometimes  ad¬ 
ministered  to  the  patient.  We  wonder  whether  the 
sick  and  famished  man  of  whom  we  read  survived 
the  two  raisin  cakes  and  the  piece  of  fig  cake  which 


204  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


were  fed  lrim.1  Where  the  sickness  was  severe  and 
death  seemed  inevitable,  no  attempt  was  made  to 
prolong  life  unnecessarily  ;  a  man’s  right  to  die  was 
recognised. 

The  neglect  of  the  patient,  so  common  in  those 
times,  and  so  distressing  to  us  as  we  contemplate  it, 
should  not  be  considered  as  evidencing  a  want  of 
affection ;  though  the  conviction  that  Yaliweh  had 
afflicted  or  sickened  the  patient  because  of  some  of¬ 
fence  committed  by  him,  would  in  many  instances 
leave  friends  in  a  doubtful  state  of  mind.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  violent  way  in  which  the  intelligence 
of  death  or  calamity  was  received  should  not  lead  us 
to  suppose  that  these  people  were  extraordinarily 
fond  of  each  other  and  endowed  in  an  unusual  degree 
with  deep  feeling.  The  custom  of  tearing  the  outer 
garment  as  a  sign  of  grief  was  undoubtedly  of  great 
antiquity  and  was  not  without  its  significance  and 
appropriateness,  shocking  as  it  may  seem  to  us  with 
our  less  demonstrative  sensibilities  and  our  ideas  of 
decency  and  self-restraint.  And  such  expressions  of 
grief  were  not,  we  have  to  notice,  isolated.  If  the 
head  of  a  family  tore  his  outer  robe,  the  other  mem¬ 
bers,  male  and  female,  did  likewise  ;  if  the  King  thus 
gave  expression  to  his  suddenly  aroused  feeling,  all 
members  of  the  Court  must  follow  his  sad  example. 
Sometimes,  indeed,  a  whole  city  would  thus  give  vent 
to  their  sorrow  caused  by  some  public  calamity,  as 
when  the  King’s  household  was  afflicted.  A  coarse 
cloth  known  as  saq  (p©),  whence  perhaps  through  the 

1  As  the  Septuagint  omits  the  raisin  cakes,  vve  may  surmise  they 
were  not  originally  mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  text. 


SICKNESS  AND  DEATH 


205 


Greek  our  own  term  sack,  would  be  donned  as  a  sym¬ 
bol  of  grief,  while  dust  or  ashes  would  be  liberally 
sprinkled  upon  the  head.  So  easily  and  so  frequently 
were  people  thrown  into  these  violent  exhibitions  of 
grief  that  it  seems  to  us  as  though  the  noise  of  rip¬ 
ping  garments  must  ever  have  been  heard.  It  is  pos¬ 
sible  that  some  seam  was  left  in  a  ripable  state ;  if 
not,  seams  must  have  multiplied  upon  the  garments 
of  most  men  with  alarming  rapidity.  One  of  the 
verbs  used  of  mourning  very  commonly  (bax)  conveys 
the  thought  of  drooping  or  fading,  but  the  more  com¬ 
mon  (iso)  means  to  beat  or  to  smite,  and  suggests  to 
us  what  was  true  of  the  people,  that  they  often  se¬ 
verely  afflicted  themselves  when  in  mourning. 

Yet,  violent  as  the  exhibitions  of  grief  were  on  the 
part  of  friends,  the  afflicted  did  not  do  all  their  wail¬ 
ing.  Hired  mourners,  of  whom  we  read  in  Jesus’ 
day,  were  apparently  employed  then.  That  grief 
over  the  loss  of  some  dear  one  seemed  to  the  afflict¬ 
ed  friend  well  nigh  unbearable,  we  need  not  wonder 
if  we  stop  to  reflect  that  the  place  of  their  departed 
in  their  thought  was  Sheol,  the  cheerless  underworld. 
No  least  expression  of  a  hope  of  a  better  environ¬ 
ment  beyond  for  their  departed  have  we  in  the  lit¬ 
erature  of  this  period.  Even  in  the  beautiful  dirge 
which  David  is  said  to  have  composed,  a  lament 
over  Saul  and  Jonathan,  there  is  not  only  no  ex¬ 
pression  of  a  larger  hope,  but  there  is  also  wanting 
the  marks  of  a  religious  character.  No  religious 
note  is  there  ;  even  Yahweh  himself  is  not  men¬ 
tioned.  Still,  though  they  thus  regarded  the  tran¬ 
sition  known  as  death,  the  departed  were  kept  in  re- 


20 G  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


membrance.  By  the  Hebrews,  bodies  of  valorous 
men  of  war  sometimes,  if  not  usually,  were,  as  among 
the  Greeks,  burnt  upon  a  funeral  pyre ; 1  and  the 
bones  sacredly  collected  and  stones  piled  high  upon 
them.2  Thus  were  such  men  long  kept  in  remem¬ 
brance.  Costly  tombs  were  often  constructed,  and 
limestone  caves  in  some  parts  of  the  land  were  ap¬ 
propriately  used.  Some  in  their  life-time  reared 
monuments  to  perpetuate  their  memory.  Such  was 
Absalom’s  monument  erected  by  him  a  considerable 
time  before  his  death  in  the  King’s  dale  near  Jeru¬ 
salem. 

1  1  Sam.  xxxi.  12;  cf.  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  C . ,  p.  253. 

*  2  Sam.  xviii.  17. 


CHAPTER  XII 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 

Worthy  of  serious  thought  is  the  epigram  of  one 
who  up  to  the  time  of  his  death  was  a  pronounced 
and  prominent  opponent  of  Christianity,  blasphe¬ 
mous  as  at  first  it  seemed  to  us  :  “An  honest  god  is 
the  noblest  work  of  man.”  One  is  reminded  of  this 
as  he  traces  the  development  of  Yahwism  among  the 
Hebrews.  The  Eternal  God  with  whom  we  all  have 
to  do  is  never  to  be  confounded  with  any  nation’s 
conception  of  Him.1  Though  He  may  seek  in  many 
ways  to  reveal  himself  to  a  people,  their  god  as  he 
is  proclaimed  by  them,  and  especially  as  he  is  set 
forth  in  their  early  literature,  is  their  thought  of 
what  God  is,  which  is  never  to  be  confounded  with 
the  Absolute  Being.  This  is  eminently  true  of  the 
Yahweh  of  the  Hebrews.  As  we  patiently  study 
their  literature  and  seek  to  know  them,  we  find  cer¬ 
tain  conceptions  of  God  as  they  apprehended  Him. 
It  is  for  us  to  account  for  these  imperfect  conceptions 
and  to  trace  the  effects  of  these  upon  their  social  life. 
We  have  not  to  do  with  the  idea  of  “  the  Divine 
Being  accommodating  Himself  ”  to  a  people  on  their 
way  up  out  of  a  low  stage  of  culture ;  we  have  to  do 

1  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex p.  1,  note;  (Wellhaueen)  Encyc. 
Brit.}  vol.  xiii.,  p.  399. 


207 


208  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


with  Yahwism.  The  low  moral  standards,  the  pas¬ 
sion,  and  the  hard,  cruel,  and  unreasonable  arbitrari¬ 
ness  belong  to  Yahwism ;  and  the  leaving  of  these 
imperfections  behind  and  the  emergence  of  a  lofty 
ethical  standard  and  of  an  inspiring  universalism  such 
as  we  find  in  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micah,  can  be 
accounted  for  if  we  note  the  ethical  development  of 
the  best  type  of  life  among  the  Hebrews.  Yahwism 
never  far  surpassed  this.  Often,  as  in  the  earlier 
time,  it  seems  to  have  fallen  behind  it,  and  it  is  to 
be  feared  that  at  its  best  in  the  eighth  century  it 
did  not  have  a  very  salutary  influence  upon  the 
social  life  of  the  people  as  a  whole,  for  the  Yah¬ 
wism  as  the  mass  of  the  people  understood  it  was 
quite  different  from  Yahwism  as  their  great  prophets 
understood  it. 

In  the  time  of  David  and  long  after,  as  in  the 
earlier  time,  Yahweh  was  conceived  as  a  war-god. 
He  glories  in  carnage  and  leads  his  people  against 
neighbouring  nations  with  no  manifestation  of  in¬ 
terest  in  or  of  pity  for  them.  In  time  of  battle  he 
gives  his  voice,  i.e.,  he  thunders,1  and  thus  encour¬ 
ages  his  people  and  discomfits  the  enemy.  If  on  oc¬ 
casion  his  people  are  vanquished,  if  they  flee  before 
their  enemies  and  are  slaughtered  it  is  because  he  in 
his  fickleness  or  his  jealousy  has  felt  slighted.  There 
may,  indeed,  have  been  committed  some  offence,  not 
of  an  immoral  character  as  we  understand  it,  but 
something  rather  in  the  way  of  failure  to  perform  an 
ancient  ritualistic  practice.  The  fat  of  a  victim 

1  1  Sam.  vii.  10;  2  Sam.  xxii  14;  Is.  xxix.  6;  cf.  1  Sam.  ii.  10; 
Psalm  xviii.  13 ;  xxix.  3. 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


209 


slaughtered  at  a  high  place  has  not  been  burnt  for 
him,  or  the  blood  has  not  been  poured  out,  or  a 
priest  at  a  local  sanctuary  has  overridden  time-hon¬ 
oured  customs  and  has  so  discouraged  the  people  that 
the  worship  of  that  particular  sanctuary  has  well 
nigh  ceased,  or,  it  may  be,  the  keeper  of  a  shrine  has 
sent  them  against  the  enemy  when  the  omens  were 
unfavourable.  Such  acts  as  these  rather  than  oppres¬ 
sion  of  the  poor  and  murder  of  the  innocent  were  in 
that  earlier  time,  in  their  thought,  the  causes  which 
stirred  up  Yahweh  to  wrath  and  provoked  him  to 
bring  confusion  upon  them. 

Sickness  and  pestilence  and  calamities  of  other 
kinds  were,  as  we  have  seen,  attributed  to  Yahweh. 
They  were  of  his  sending  and  were  often  traced,  as 
was  failure  in  a  campaign  against  an  enemy,  to  some 
offence  committed  by  them  that  Yahweh  could  not 
condone.  The  supposed  offence  may  seem  innocent 
enough  to  us  where  it  was  nothing  more  than  the 
enrolment  of  the  fighting  men ;  but  when  it  was  the 
violation  of  a  covenant  with  a  neighbouring  people 
there  was  reason,  as  we  can  see,  for  thinking  Yah¬ 
weh,  in  whose  name  covenants  were  made  and  who 
watched  over  these  sacred  compacts,  to  be  aggrieved 
whenever  they  failed  to  live  up  to  their  covenant  obli¬ 
gations.  That  he  should  have  been  conceived  of  as 
requiring  the  blood  of  members  of  a  family  the  head 
of  which  had  in  his  treatment  of  a  people  broken  a 
covenant  made  with  them,  we  can  understand,  but  we 
can  also  easily  see  how  such  a  king  as  David  might 
plead  the  necessity  of  avengmg,  in  Yah  well’s  name, 
the  violation  of  an  old  covenant  as  excuse  for  de- 


210  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


stroying  tlie  male  members  of  a  rival  house.  We 
have  no  sadder  example  of  the  cruel  side  of  the  Yah- 
wism  of  those  times  than  is  presented  in  the  slaugh¬ 
terings  of  Jehu,  who  in  his  zeal  for  Yahweh  which 
was  stimulated  by  Elisha,  involved,  according  to  the 
chronicler,  North  Israel  in  a  carnival  of  blood,  in 
which  the  innocent  apparently  went  down  with  the 
guilty.  That  Jehu  was  utterly  wanting  in  the  com¬ 
mon  principles  of  humanity  and  that  his  conduct 
was  wholly  selfish  and  vengeful  seems  indisputable. 
Elisha  mistook  his  man.  He  chose  in  Jehu  one 
utterly  unfit  to  right  abuses  and  unfit  to  reign  after 
having  tried  to  right  them  ;  yet  he  seems  not  to  have 
discovered  anything  offensive  to  Yahwism  in  the 
high-handed  and  bloody  way  in  which  Jehu  conducted 
himself.1  Yahwism  as  he  understood  it  was  easily 
reconcilable  with  such  conduct.  Perhaps  it  was  this 
side  of  the  prophet  and  his  proverbial  disposition 
to  consider  Yahweh  as  vengeful,  that  explains  the 
she-bear  story,  with  which  his  name  is  unpleasantly 
associated.  Such  misconceptions  of  God’s  character 
as  thus  appear  in  the  Yahwism  of  those  times  neces¬ 
sarily  wrought  disastrously.  They  made  themselves 
unhappily  felt  upon  the  social  life  of  the  people.  A 
strong,  pure  society  was  impossible  so  long  as  such 
thoughts  of  the  Divine  Being  inspired  or  controlled 
the  conduct  of  men.  At  times,  we  must  believe,  a 
man’s  sense  of  right  triumphed,  his  humane  senti¬ 
ments  got  the  better  of  him,  and  he  did  what  he  felt 
to  be  right  regardless  of  consequences.  Usually, 
however,  it  was  otherwise ;  and  much  of  the  moral 

1  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex p.  124  ff. 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


211 


obliquity  which  -we  discover  among  the  Hebrews  of 
the  monarchy  must  be  charged  to  Yahwism,  though 
for  the  character  of  Yahwism  they  were  themselves 
at  least  partially  responsible.  It  was  of  their  own 
making,  and  though  superior  in  many  respects  to 
the  religion  of  other  peoples  of  antiquity,  it  had  its 
great  limitations  and  imperfections  that  made  them¬ 
selves  powerfully  felt  upon  the  social  life  of  the 
people. 

The  limitations  in  the  Hebrew  conception  of  Yah- 
weh  as  God  appear  in  the  anthropomorphisms  of 
those  times.  Here,  probabty,  we  are  not  as  in  the 
later  time  to  think  of  mere  figures  of  speech  as  when 
we  are  told  that  Yahweli  amused  himself  at  the 
expense  of  the  Egyptians,  or  that  he  sitteth  in  the 
heavens  and  laughs  at  the  confusion  of  the  heathen. 
The  J  narrative  of  creation  speaks  of  Yahwreh  as 
forming  man  and  the  beasts  out  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  etc.,  because  the  writers  of  it  could  not  think 
of  him  as  making  man  in  any  other  way.  The  cos¬ 
mogony  of  J  belongs  to  the  thought  of  the  time.  In 
few  respects  does  it  rise  superior  to  it. 

But  if  the  basal  conceptions  of  Yahwism  were  at 
fault  and  were  unfortunate  in  their  influence  upon  the 
people,  quite  as  surely  were  the  ways  in  which  Yah- 
weh  was  gratified  or  appeased,  or  the  ways  in  which 
his  will  or  wish  was  ascertained  socially  demoralis¬ 
ing.  Wine  and  blood  were  poured  out  to  him  and  fat 
was  burnt  for  his  gratification  as  in  the  earlier  time. 
Such  offerings  were  conceived  of  as  peculiarly  pleas¬ 
ing  to  him.  The  old  sanctuaries  continued  in  favour 
and  were  certainly  used  until  Josiah’s  day;  they 


212  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


probably  were  much  later.  High  places  increased  as 
the  population  increased  and  spread  over  the  land. 
Altars  and  shrines  were  under  many  a  great  oak  and 
terebinth.  At  the  prominent  sanctuaries  the  one 
great  annual  feast  was  still  observed ;  at  these  and  at 
the  high  places,  social  gatherings  of  a  minor  character 
were  often  held,  when  the  people  feasted  with  their 
god  and  made  merry,  pouring  out  the  blood  and 
burning  the  fat  to  Yahweh  as  his  portion.  Wine  was 
thus  offered,  and  under  certain  circumstances  water 
might  be  poured  out.  If  a  prince  gave  a  feast  to  his 
companions  he  took  them  to  some  sacrificial  stone  or 
holy  place.  Absalom  went  with  his  friends  to  He¬ 
bron  and  worshipped  there  the  Yahweh  of  Hebron. 
Adonijah  took  the  King’s  sons  to  the  stone  of  Zolie- 
letli.  Sometimes,  it  is  true,  when  there  seemed  to 
be  special  reason  for  it,  cattle  were  slaughtered  where 
they  chanced  to  be,  the  wood  of  the  yoke  and  of  the 
threshing-sledge  or  wagon  being  used  for  the  sacrifi¬ 
cial  fire. 

Human  sacrifices,  of  which  there  are  abundant 
traces  up  to  the  time  of  the  Exile,  were  common  in 
this  as  in  the  earlier  period.  In  accordance  with  the 
custom  of  the  people  of  their  time,  or  in  obedience 
to  some  vow,  captives  taken  in  war,  personal  enemies 
and  even  members  of  one’s  own  family,  were  offered 
by  pious  Hebrews.  It  was  only  in  the  late  literature 
of  the  prophets  that  the  practice  was  denounced. 
The  story  of  Abraham’s  unfulfilled  sacrifice  of  Isaac 
belongs  to  the  time  of  the  monarchy.  In  the  early 
literature  there  was  no  thought  of  suggesting  a  sub¬ 
stitute,  unless  it  be  that  the  law  in  Exodus  xiii.  13  ff. 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


213 


and  xxxiv.  20  ff.  is  early,  which  seems  improbable,1 
and  that  the  victim  substituted  for  Jonathan  when  ho 
by  touching  and  eating  food  upon  which  a  taboo  had 
been  placed  became  himself  taboo,  was  an  animal 
instead  of  a  human  being.  Jephtliali’s  daughter  was 
sacrificed;  so  also  were  the  seventy  sons  of  Jerub- 
baal.  The  frequent  mention  of  human  sacrifices  dur¬ 
ing  this  period,  which  has  an  astonishingly  large 
number  of  references  to  them,  should  not  be  contrast¬ 
ed  with  the  less  frequent  mention  of  them  in  the  ear¬ 
lier  literature,  for  the  probability  is  that  the  earlier 
period  witnessed  such  sacrifices  with  even  greater 
frequency.  The  devotion  of  a  family  or  of  a  com¬ 
munity  to  Yaliweh  and  their  consequent  destruction 
is  to  be  included  under  this  head  as  in  the  nature 
of  human  sacrifices.  Thus  at  the  time  of  the  settle¬ 
ment  a  few,  at  least,  of  the  weaker  cities  inhabited  by 
the  Canaanites  may  have  been,  as  they  fell  into  the 
hands  of  the  Hebrews,  so  devoted  as  appears  to  have 
been  the  case  later.  Nothing  in  the  character  of  the 
Yahwism  of  the  time  now  under  consideration  is 
more  revolting  to  us  than  the  thought  that  the  He¬ 
brews  could  unblushingly  conceive  of  Yahweh  as 
wishing  to  drink  the  blood  of  such  victims.  Yet  this 
is  something  that  may  not  be  overlooked  if  we  wish 
to  determine  the  influence  of  Yahwism  upon  their 
social  life. 

9 

1  That  this  law  was  a  part  of  J  and  that  in  its  origin  it  may  be 
considerably  older  than  the  ninth  century  may  be  readily  admitted 
so  far  as  it  had  to  do  with  the  first-born  of  man.  That  it  did  not 
forbid  human  sacrifices  under  certain  circumstances  should,  how¬ 
ever,  be  recognised. 


214  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


The  medium  by  which  the  will  of  Yahweh  was 
determined  until  the  prophets  came  to  the  front  was 
the  sacred  lot  which  was  employed  in  the  earlier 
time.  Necessarily  its  decisions  were  of  an  arbitrary 
and  erratic  character.  Just  what  the  lot  was  and 
just  how  it  was  taken  we  cannot  say,  though  we  may 
surmise  with  some  degree  of  probability.  There  is 
frequent  mention  in  the  earlier  literature  of  epliod- 
idols  which  are  now  thought  to  have  been  images  of 
Yahweh,  while  in  the  later  time  the  ephod  appears  to 
have  been  made  of  linen  and  to  have  been  worn.  That 
the  ephod  of  the  time  of  Saul  and  David  was  what  it 
was  earlier  is  disguised  by  our  translators,  who  speak 
of  it  as  being  worn  when  the  Hebrew  text  and  the 
Septuagint  both  use  the  verb  “  to  bear,”  which  can¬ 
not  reasonably  be  interpreted  to  refer  to  the  wear¬ 
ing  of  anything.1  In  the  earlier  time  Gideon  made 
for  himself  an  ephod  idol.  Micah  also  had  one. 
Upon  two  occasions  David  during  his  wandering  life 
is  known  to  have  called  for  the  ephod-idol.  These 
images  were  carried  at  a  later  day  in  time  of  battle, 
probably  in  the  Ark.  If  they  were  not  identified  with 
Yahweh  and  worshipped,  they  were  certainly  held 
in  peculiar  esteem.  The  sacred  lot  appears  to  have 
been  cast  before  them.  This  was  the  purpose  for 
which  David  desired  the  ephod  on  the  occasions  just 
mentioned.  In  the  first  instance  he  wished  to  know 
if  Saul  would  come  down  and  if  the  men  of  Keilah 
could  be  trusted.2  The  sacred  lot  decided  the  first 

1  It  is  probable  that  in  the  later  literature  the  verb  was  more 
loosely  used. 

3  Samuel  xxiii.  2. 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


215 


question  affirmatively,  the  second  negatively.  In  the 
second  instance  David  desired  to  know  whether  if  he 
pursued  the  Amalekites  he  should  overtake  them  and 
secure  the  booty  which  they  had  gotten.  Here  again 
the  lot  was  affirmative.  Similarly,  the  five  Danites 
of  a  much  earlier  time  inquired  through  a  Levite 
when  on  a  prospecting  tour  to  ascertain  whether  their 
journey  would  be  propitious.1  An  affirmative  answer, 
corroborated  by  the  sequel,  so  prejudiced  the  Danites 
in  favour  of  this  man  and  the  sanctuary  of  Micali 
which  he  served  as  minister,  that  they  later,  when  mi¬ 
grating  northward,  seized  and  took  with  them  the 
epliod  and  other  images  together  with  the  attendant, 
leaving  Micah,  in  so  doing,  in  tears.  Just  how  the 
lot,  which  was  by  Urim  and  Tliummim  before  the 
ephod-idol,  was  taken,  we  cannot  say  positively. 
Apparently,  as  Dr.  Smith  suggests,  the  Urim  and 
Tliummim  were  pebbles,2  one  of  wffiicli  may  have  been 
white,  the  other  coloured,  so  that  one  gave  the  affirm¬ 
ative  and  the  other  the  negative.  The  sacred  lot  was 
long  and  largely  used  among  the  Hebrews  of  all 
classes,  both  in  ordinary  and  in  extraordinary  affairs, 
and  seems  to  have  been  received  with  well  nigh  uni¬ 
versal  favour  despite  the  fact  that  mere  chance  played 
so  large  a  place  in  its  decisions.  We  must  not  allow 
ourselves  to  be  misled  by  such  phrases  as  “  inquired 
of  Yahweh,”  or  “  asked  Yahweh,”  into  supposing  that 
the  request  was  made  in  the  form  of  audible  or  in¬ 
audible  prayer.  It  was  the  sacred  lot  which  was  used. 
Prayer  as  wre  understand  it  was  not  made  during  the 

1  Judges  xviii.  5. 

2H.  P.  Smith,  Samuel ,  I.  (7.,  p.  122. 


216  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


earlier  centuries  under  consideration.  Something  in 
the  nature  of  an  invocation  there  might  be  when  a 
man  put  his  hand  to  some  task  of  great  magnitude, 
as:  “May  Yahweh  be  gracious,”  or  “May  Yahweh 
give  success  ;  ”  while  at  sanctuaries  a  vow  might  serve 
as  a  prayer,  as  when  Hannah  is  said  to  have  prayed. 
A  new  day  dawned  upon  Israel  when  men  of  God  of 
irreproachable  character  came  to  the  front  and  offered 
themselves  as  interpreters  of  the  will  of  Yahweh. 
Such  men  might  make  mistakes  occasionally ;  but 
there  could  never  be  about  their  decisions  the  irre¬ 
sponsible  character  that  there  was  about  the  sacred 
lot.  Here,  too,  it  must  be  admitted,  was  an  oppor¬ 
tunity  for  selfish,  characterless  men  to  exploit  both 
king  and  people;  such  men  did  actually  appear. 
They  wrought  great  injury  as  false  prophets.  But 
the  higli-souled  man  as  an  interpreter  of  the  will  of 
Yahweh  had,  as  we  have  intimated,  an  important 
and  beneficent  mission  that  was  most  happy  in  its 
effects  upon  society.  Such  men  belonged  to  the 
purified  Yahwism  of  the  eighth  century,  which  ap¬ 
pears  to  have  been  the  possession  of  a  few  favoured 
ones. 

Aside  from  the  stories  of  the  worship  of  Baal  and 
Astarte  in  the  north  when  Jezebel,  the  Tyrian  prin¬ 
cess,1  came  forward  as  their  patron,  the  actual  rec¬ 
ords  of  these  centuries  give  us  little  concerning  these 
foreign  cults,  for  we  must  reject  the  pragmatism  of 
the  Deuteronomist  in  the  Books  of  the  Kings.  This 
is  surprising,  for  we  cannot  believe  that  Baal  and 
Astarte  so  soon  ceased  to  dispute  with  Yahweh  the 

1  Budde,  Ret.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex.,  p.  116  II. 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


217 


possession  of  the  land  and  the  service  of  the  people. 
It  is  singular  that  the  Books  of  the  Chronicles  fur¬ 
nish  us  a  key  to  the  situation.  Certain  names  which 
appear  in  Chronicles,  as  Ishbaal,  the  name  of  a  son 
of  Saul,  Meribaal,  the  name  of  a  son  of  Jonathan, 
Baaliada,  a  son  of  David,  etc.,  reveal  that  Baal  was 
long  held  in  honour  among  the  Hebrews.  The  fact 
that  these  names  appear  in  2  Samuel  as  Ishbosheth, 
Mephibosheth,  Eliada,  etc. — impossible  names  in  the 
first  two  instances  at  least  for  fathers  to  give  their 
sons — raises  on  our  part  the  query  whether  the 
Books  of  Samuel  did  not  have  erased  from  them 
well  nigh  all  traces  of  the  worship  of  Baal  and  As- 
tarte.  The  wretched  condition  of  the  texts  of  these 
books  as  they  now  stand  may  be  considered  an 
argument  in  favour  of  this.  Surely  a  hand  that 
could  thus  change  the  names  of  prominent  indi¬ 
viduals  could  also  work  over  or  delete  passages. 
That  Yahweh,  as  the  Hebrews  increased  in  numbers 
and  importance  and  absorbed  the  old  Canaanites, 
came  to  be  regarded  as  the  God  of  the  land  is  evi¬ 
dent,  though  there  are  reasons  for  believing  that  at 
most  of  the  high  places  and  sanctuaries  Baal  and 
Astarte  were  worshipped  more  or  less  until  the 
Exile. 

As  we  come  down  into  the  days  of  the  earlier 
prophets,  who  have  left  us  in  writing  some  fragments 
of  their  work,  we  marvel  not  more  over  the  exalted 
conception  of  Yahweh  which  they  present  us  than  we 
do  over  their  insistence  upon  an  ethical  code  that 
must  have  been  much  in  advance  of  their  day.1  That 

1  Budde,  Rel.  of  Is.  to  the  Ex.,  p.  127  ff. 


218  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


it  was  far  from  being  practised  among  their  people 
we  know.  Their  warnings  and  denunciations  make 
this  evident  enough.  We  have,  however,  to  recognise 
the  fact  that  the  J  and  E  narratives  which  appear  to 
have  come  from  men  of  the  prophetic  type  of  mind 
who  antedated  Amos  and  Hosea  a  half  century  or 
more,  give  us,  with  all  their  anthropomorphisms 
and  inadequate  moral  conceptions  of  Yah  well,  a  lof¬ 
tier  range  of  thought  than  we  find  in  2  Samuel  and 
1  Kings. 

According  to  Amos,  Yahweh  is  still  the  thunderer ; 
he  is  also  the  one  who  smites  with  blasting  and  mil¬ 
dew  garden  and  orchard  and  vineyard ;  who  sends  the 
palmer-worm  and  the  locust,  and  who  causes  the  past¬ 
ures  of  the  shepherds  to  mourn  and  the  top  of  Carmel 
to  wither.  He  is  more  :  as  creator  he  formed  light 
and  created  darkness,  he  shaped  the  mountains  and 
brought  forth  the  winds.  As  controller  among  the 
nations  he  guided  the  migrations  of  the  olden  time 
and  watched  over  the  destinies  of  Israel.  Nor  is  this 
the  whole  story,  for  Yahweh  is  he  from  whom  nothing 
has  been  hidden,  and  who  has  seen  and  punished 
iniquity,  sending  his  afilictive  judgments,  locust  and 
palmer-worm  and  pestilence  and  other  calamity ;  but 
who  has  also  raised  up  Nazarite  and  prophet,  reveal¬ 
ing  to  the  latter  his  secret  councils  in  his  endeavour 
to  succour  and  save  his  people.  As  one  who  loves  the 
right  and  hates  the  evil,  cannot  overlook  injustice 
nor  let  inhumanity  go  unpunished.  He  is  not  to  be 
propitiated  by  sacrifices ;  they  are  an  offence  to  him. 
The  worship  of  the  sanctuaries,  with  their  vain  din, 
their  lewdness  and  drunkenness  and  extortion,  he 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


219 


utterly  abhors.  The  taking  of  bribes,  the  oppression 
of  the  poor  and  the  denial  of  justice  to  the  needy,  the 
selling  of  the  righteous  into  slavery  and  the  inhuman¬ 
ity  of  the  rich,  he  must  punish.  Luxurious  idleness 
he  loathes ;  even,  such  is  his  love  of  simplicity, 
houses  of  hewn  stone  and  ivory  palaces  please  him 
not.  Inhumanity  both  within  and  without  Israel 
Yahweh  will  punish,  bringing  upon  great  and  con¬ 
spicuous  offenders  an  awful  doom.  Other  outrageous 
sinners  are  to  be  brought  to  confusion — into  captivity 
they  must  go.  Yet  Yahweh  is  gracious ;  and  a  rem¬ 
nant  of  Joseph  will  upon  reformation  be  spared. 

To  Hosea,  Yahweh’s  interests  were  local.  As  the 
God  of  Israel  he  devotes  himself  to  Israel.  His  lov¬ 
ing  care  has  been  with  them  from  of  old,  wdien  he 
made  choice  of  them  and  brought  them  forth.  He 
has  shown  himself  tenderly  and  lovingly  pitiful  as  he 
has  borne  with  the  infidelity  of  his  people  in  his 
hope  that  he  might  bring  them  back  to  their  old  al¬ 
legiance.  In  his  endeavour  to  save  his  people  he  has 
sought  to  hedge  up  their  way  and  to  restrain  them 
rather  than  to  afflict.  If  he  has  torn,  it  has  been 
that  he  might  heal.  That  his  people  might  return  to 
him  and  do  righteously  ;  that  they  might  show  mercy 
in  the  common  relations  of  life  rather  than  multiply 
sacrifices  at  their  sanctuaries  and  high  places,  he  has 
affectionately  dealt  with  them.  Such  dealing  on  his 
part  has  found  no  reciprocation  on  their  part.  From 
bad  to  worse  they  have  gone,  until  even  priest  and 
prophet  are  involved  in  the  common  ruin.  The 
wealth  of  Ephraim  is  not  to  save  him  ;  political  en¬ 
tanglements  will  but  render  more  inevitable  the  evil 


220  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


day.  Among  them  there  is  no  truth,  nor  is  there 
mercy,  knowledge  of  God  is  wanting ;  false  swearing, 
the  breaking  of  covenant  obligations,  theft,  adultery, 
and  murder  abound ;  divination,  drunkenness,  and 
lewdness  at  high  places  and  under  sacred  trees  are 
also  to  be  charged  to  them.  All  this,  in  view  of  the 
past  pitifulness  of  Yahweh,  necessitates  on  his  part 
severe  discipline.  Destruction  must  come  upon  them. 
Yain,  proud  Ephraim  must  come  to  naught;  as  the 
morning  cloud,  as  the  smoke  of  a  chimney,  he  must 
pass  away ;  even  the  land  must  mourn ;  all  nature 
must  languish.  Yet  even  here  there  is,  as  the  proph¬ 
et  pleads  with  an  incorrigible  people,  hope  of  a 
brighter  day  if  they  but  repentantly  return. 

The  prophecies  of  Micah  should  be  considered  in 
connection  with  the  work  of  Hosea.  He  closely  fol¬ 
lowed  him;  his  discourses  abound  in  references  to 
the  people  of  the  north,  especially  Samaria,  the 
doom  of  which  seemed  to  be  impending ;  he  also,  like 
his  predecessor,  was  keenly  sensitive  to  social  wrongs. 
Yahweh  to  him  was  an  exalted  being  before  whom 
mountains  melt  and  valleys  are  cleft ;  but  it  was  not 
so  much  these  aspects  of  Yahweh  that  appealed  to 
him  as  it  was  his  determination  to  purify  society  and 
obliterate  old  lines  of  cleavage.  Sacrifices  he  desires 
not ;  they  are  a  weariness  to  him.  In  order  to  please 
him  men  must  do  justly,  love  mercy,  and  walk  hum¬ 
bly.  This  the  men  of  his  day  were  not  doing.  The 
rich  were  full  of  violence  ;  and  deceit  was  in  the 
mouth  of  all.  Those  in  authority  abhorred  judgment 
and  prevented  equity  ;  while  all  were  haters  of  good 
and  lovers  of  evil.  By  night  upon  their  beds  men 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


221 


devised  the  evil  they  were  to  practise  during  the  day. 
Fields  they  coveted  and  seized.  The  most  helpless, 
the  women  and  the  children,  were  cast  out ;  and  in¬ 
human  deeds  were  practised  on  all  sides,  though  no¬ 
where  more  openly  and  impiously  than  in  Samaria. 
In  Micali’s  thought  a  day  of  reckoning  could  not  be 
avoided.  It  would  come,  bringing  destruction  to 
graven  images  and  their  worshippers  ;  to  “  devoted 
women”  and  to  sanctuaries.  Not  only  would  they  sow 
and  fail  to  reap,  tread  olives  and  fail  to  anoint  them¬ 
selves,  tread  grapes  and  fail  to  drink  of  the  wine  ;  but 
the  people  would  also  suffer  from  the  hand  of  the 
devastator.  But  this  same  prophet  has  a  bright  pict¬ 
ure  of  the  good  time  coming  when  in  the  latter  day 
Yah  well’s  house  was  to  be  established  in  his  hill,  and 
as  the  nations  were  brought  under  his  hand  universal 
righteousness  and  peace  were  to  prevail.  Under  him 
a  new  prince  was  to  arise  who  was  to  shepherd  his 
people  gently  and  lovingly. 

With  greater  fulness  and  with  richer  imagery  does 
Isaiah  appear  before  us  manifesting  the  same  interest 
in  social  well-being  and  revealing  the  same  lofty. type 
of  Yahwism.  To  him,  Yahweh  is  one  who  is  to  arise 
to  strike  terror  in  the  earth ;  one  from  whose  splendour 
and  majesty  a  disobedient  people  should  hide  them¬ 
selves.  In  his  own  experience  he  had  seen  him  seat¬ 
ed  upon  a  throne,  high  and  lifted  up,  before  whom 
cherubim  stood.  In  sight  of  such  a  one  incorrigible 
sinners  cannot  indefinitely  disport  themselves.  By 
his  fury  he  will  burn  up  their  land.  Against  them 
he  has  stirred  up  foreign  foes.  Yet  Yahweh  is  one 
who  has  planted  a  vineyard,  and  has  lavished  upon 


222  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


it  affectionately  his  care,  though  to  no  purpose,  for  it 
has  brought  forth  naught  but  wild  grapes.  Such  was 
the  condition  of  things  socially  from  740  B.c.  onward 
for  nearly  forty  years,  the  period  covered  by  this 
prophet,  that  he  saw  no  hope  of  salvation  save  in  a 
righteous  remnant.  The  rottenness  of  the  mass  did 
not  escape  the  observation  of  a  man  who  lived  in  the 
midst  of  it,  and  had  daily  to  do  with  it.  Idolatry, 
drunkenness,  and  lewdness  were  still  rife  at  the  high 
places  and  sanctuaries.  Diviners  from  the  East  and 
soothsayers  from  the  Philistines  made  spoil  of  the 
people.  Those  who  were  but  youths  served  as  princes 
and  insulting  boys  lorded  it  over  them.  And  these, 
ground  the  face  of  the  poor,  crushed  the  needy,  and 
spoiled  those  possessed  of  means.  The  wealthy 
women  of  Jerusalem  were  vain,  dressy,  gay,  artful, 
and  characterless.  Yet  was  the  land,  at  least  in  the 
earlier  days  of  this  prophet,  rich  in  silver  and  in 
gold,  in  horses  and  in  chariots.  This,  however,  led 
not  to  contentment,  for  even  the  rich  sought  to 
add  field  to  field,  and  house  to  house.  It  may  be 
that  we  have  here  in  Isaiah  of  the  capital  as  we  have 
in  Amos  of  the  meagre  region  to  the  southeast  of 
Jerusalem  an  ascetic  note  that  is  not  altogether  health¬ 
ful  ;  but  that  the  society  of  his  day  was  wretchedly 
bad  we  must  believe.  Worst  of  all  was  the  fact  that 
moral  distinctions  were  obscured  so  that  men  called, 
perhaps  unwittingly,  evil  good,  and  darkness  light. 
The  value  of  these  prophets  to  their  people  was  not 
so  much  in  the  actual  reforms  which  they  inaugurated, 
for  they  appear  to  have  had  comparatively  little  in¬ 
fluence  upon  their  own  time,  as  in  that  they  clarified 


THE  PURIFICATION  OF  YAHWISM 


223 


the  minds  of  the  few  and  by  their  clear  distinctions 
and  high  ideals  prepared  the  way  for  the  new  day 
which  they  all  believed  would  follow  upon  the  sifting 
which  the  people  would  get  through  Yahweh’s  dis¬ 
ciplinary  afflictions. 

We  may  think  of  these  prophets  as  having  their 
forerunners  in  the  “  men  of  Yahweli,”  or  “  men  of 
Elohim,”  who  appear  before  us  in  the  earlier  period 
but  dimly.  Or  we  may  think  of  the  wild  enthusiasts 
of  Saul’s  time  as  in  some  sense  their  forerunners. 
This  is  even  more  doubtful  as  a  supposition.  It 
seems  more  reasonable  to  think  of  such  men  as 
Elijah  and  Elisha  and  Micaiah  ben  Imlak  by  whom 
Yahweli  spake  in  the  days  of  Ahab  of  North  Israel, 
and  Jonah  ben  Amittai  by  whom  Yahweh  addressed 
Jeroboam  II.,  as  the  real  predecessors  of  the  proph¬ 
ets  whose  discourses  we  have.  And  these  earlier 
prophets  named  above  must  have  been  closely  in 
touch  with  the  schools  known  to  us  as  J  and  E. 
Some  of  them  were  very  likely  members  of  it. 

Nowhere  in  the  literature  of  this  period  do  we  find 
trace  of  the  doctrine  of  evil  spirits  that  appeared  in 
Jewish  literature  after  Persian  influence  made  itself 
felt.  Good  spirits  are  mentioned  as  associated  with 
Yahweh.  Through  these  he  frequently  accomplishes 
his  purposes,  putting  at  times  words  of  deceit  upon 
their  tongues  that  he  may  misguide  men.  It  is  prob¬ 
able  that  the  thought  of  evil  spirits,  and  more  par¬ 
ticularly  of  Satan,  came  to  the  Jewish  mind  as  fur¬ 
nishing  some  sort  of  relief,  dissatisfied  as  it  was 
then  getting  over  its  conception  of  Yahweh.  In  the 
purified  Yahwism  of  the  prophets  there  was  no  need 


224  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

of  it.  Had  the  thought  of  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and 
Micah  been  heartily  espoused,  foreign  influence 
would  have  found  small  place  in  later  Jewish  thought. 
But  the  hearty  espousal  of  their  thought  would  have 
affected  even  more  beneficently  the  social  life  of 
their  own  and  of  later  generations. 


CHAPTER  XIII 


THE  CONCLUSION 

The  writer  of  this  volume,  after  seeing  the  Tissot 
pictures  or  illustrations  of  the  life  of  Jesus  in  New 
York,  compared  experiences  with  an  estimable  Chris¬ 
tian  woman  who  has  travelled  in  the  Holy  Land. 
During  the  course  of  the  conversation  he  put  to  her 
the  question  he  had  wished  someone  to  answer : 
“What  about  the  rich,  even  high,  Venetian  colouring 
of  the  pictures  ;  can  it  be  that  they  are  true  to  life, 
to  local  colour  ?  Palestine  surely  can  never  have  had 
so  much  colour?  ”  “  Yes,”  was  the  reply,  “  Tissot  is 

true  to  life  here.  Most  Eastern  buildings  are  a  dingy 
white,  but  such  is  the  witchery  of  light  in  that  prac¬ 
tically  cloudless  land  that  the  charm  of  colour  is 
thrown  over  everything,  beautifying  and  glorifying 
all.” 1 

The  reader  of  this  book,  if  he  has  had  the  patience 
to  push  through  its  pages,  has  followed  an  honest 
and  painstaking  attempt  to  depict  the  social  life  of 
the  Hebrews ;  but  he  has  looked  at  dim,  colourless 
pencil  sketches,  not  a  series  of  richly  or  brilliantly 

1  The  answer  given  to  this  question  as  to  colour  has  not  been 
verified.  It  is  singular  to  what  extent  travellers  in  Palestine  have 
allowed  the  archaeological  sense  to  determine  the  character  of  their 
work.  Artists  with  an  eye  for  local  colour  may  after  all  in  some 
particulars  be  our  best  interpreters  of  Eastern  life. 

225 


226  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews 


coloured  prints.  Hints  here  and  there  he  has  found 
that  have  enabled  him,  if  possessed  of  considerable 
imagination,  to  discover  a  little  local  colour  and  so  to 
gain  a  glimpse  of  the  real  life  of  the  people.  The  first 
period  is  one  that  marked  a  readjustment  of  the  He¬ 
brew  clans,  a  settlement  in  the  midst  of  a  new  ethno¬ 
graphical  and  geographical  environment,  into  which, 
unbidden  and  un welcomed,  they  had  made  their  way 
and  for  which  they  were  willing  to  fight.  In  some  way 
they  had  been  weaned  from  and  outgrown  the  desert 
and  nomadic  life  and  made  willing,  even  though 
to  them  their  Yahweh  was  the  God  of  the  sublime 
southern  mountains  and  its  desert  solitudes,  to  ad¬ 
venture,  prepared  for  enterprise.  Perhaps  already 
their  moral  and  intellectual  values  had  increased  be¬ 
yond  the  nomadic  stage.1  Bo  it  seems  to  us,  but 
however  this  may  have  been,  we  know  that  they  can¬ 
not  have  possessed  a  strong  consciousness  of  the 
land  into  which  they  went  as  peculiarly  theirs.  It 
may  even  be  questioned  whether  they  had  any  tra¬ 
ditions  of  ancient  progenitors  who  had  wandered 
therein.  Even  if  they  had  such  traditions  they 
could  hardly  have  thought  of  them  as  a  warrant  for 
claiming  the  soil  of  Canaan,  for  the  conception  of 
property  in  land  then  prevalent  would  hardly  have 
allowed  this.  Right  to  land  was  largely  summed  up 
in  the  question  of  possession  ;  and  the  Canaanites 
held  Canaan ;  their  local  Baalim  were  the  proprie¬ 
tors  of  the  soil.  But  having  gone  in  and  having 
made  themselves  fairly  at  home  therein,  the  He¬ 
brews  soon  secured  a  competence  and  made  them- 

1  Hastings’  Dictionary ,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  820. 


THE  CONCLUSION 


227 


selves  comfortable  as  they  also  in  time  made  them¬ 
selves  feared  if  not  respected.  And  they  were  not 
long  in  developing  a  love  for  the  land  which  was 
really  vastly  superior  to  that  which  they  had  left 
behind.  They  came  to  glory  in  its  hills  and  vales, 
its  lakes  and  water-courses,  its  distant  mountains 
and  its  more  distant  sea. 

The  period  which  we  have  studied  in  our  second 
part  has  proved  much  richer,  not  merely  because  of 
the  more  abundant  literature  which  it  has  passed  on 
to  us,  but  also  because  it  presents  to  us  a  higher  and 
more  complex  type  of  civilisation.  What  appears 
in  the  germ  in  the  earlier  period  appears  in  this,  in 
its  fruitage ;  and  though  in  its  perfected  form  it  may 
disappoint  us,  it  surely  has  more  interest  for  us  than 
can  be  found  in  its  less  developed  forms.  Life  as 
lived  in  this  later  stage  was  lived  under  monarchies. 
These  though  small,  and  it  may  be  just  because  they 
were  small  and  so  within  the  sphere  of  vision  of  most 
of  the  people,  gave  life  most  of  its  colour.  The  peo¬ 
ple  could  not  forget  that  they  lived  under  such  rulers. 
In  little  ways  they  were  being  continually  reminded 
of  this  overlordship,  sometimes  unpleasantly,  at  other 
times  most  pleasantly.  Life  had  meanwhile  for  many 
lost  its  meagre  and  strenuous  character.  There  were 
greater  opportunities  for  leisure  and  more  to  inter¬ 
est  men  when  unoccupied  with  the  sterner  things  of 
life.  There  was  on  the  whole,  moreover,  less  inse¬ 
curity.  The  Canaanites  were  becoming  a  part  of 
them ;  they  were  no  longer  to  be  feared.  The  He¬ 
brews  could  think  of  themselves  as  destined  to  be¬ 
come,  if  not  already,  the  real  possessors  of  the  land. 


228  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


With  this  growing  consciousness  there  came  inevit¬ 
ably  a  conviction  that  their  Yahweh  was,  after  all,  a 
superior  God.  This  prepared  them  for  the  assertions 
of  the  universality  of  Yahweh,  a  doctrine  that  was  to 
survive  the  purifying  fires  of  the  Captivity  before  it 
could  reach  its  best  fruitage. 

But  what  of  the  actual  life  lived  therein ;  was  it 
to  them  interesting  and  joyous?  Preeminently  so. 
Life  was  not  colourless,  it  rather  was  full  of  colour, 
though  not  without  its  arduous  toil,  its  struggles 
and  its  sacrifices.  Somehow  these  people  found 
even  in  heroic  effort  and  in  conflict  a  peculiar  satis¬ 
faction.  Children  of  the  East,  they  yet  were  not 
effeminate.  Even  to  this  day  the  Jewish  stock  is 
full  of  vigour,  not  so  much  because  there  has  been 
incorporation  from  without,  though  it  is  undoubtedly 
true  that  no  Jewish  blood  is  pure,  as  because  the 
original  vitality  has  not  spent  itself. 

A  study  of  the  social  life  of  the  Hebrews  of  these 
periods  reminds  one  of  the  early  Greek  life,  described 
so  vividly  and  fascinatingly  by  the  Homeridae,  a  life 
practically  contemporaneous  with  this.  Into  the 
plains  one  must  go  to  find  the  more  important 
paraphernalia  of  war  as  the  iron-bound  chariot 
with  its  driver,  its  shield-bearer,  and  its  warrior, 
drawn  by  prancing  steeds  which  smelt  the  battle 
from  afar  and  joyed  therein;  yet  among  the  hills 
one  finds  spearmen  as  well  as  bowmen,  dwelling 
for  the  most  part  in  willed  cities  and  possessed 
of  most  of  the  utilities  of  their  time.  Life  was 
as  strenuous  as  among  the  Greeks  and  certainly  as 
joyous  and  undoubtedly  even  more  hopeful,  for  re- 


THE  CONCLUSION 


229 


ligion  meant  more  to  the  Hebrews  than  it  did  to 
the  Greeks. 

It  is  matter  for  keen  regret  that  most  of  the  early 
Hebrew  poetry  was  lost.  While  rejoicing  in  the  folk¬ 
tales  and  the  chronicles  without  which  we  could  not 
reproduce  that  old  life,  we  still  feel  the  loss  of  the 
greater  part  of  the  early  poetry.  So  richly  sugges¬ 
tive  are  the  Song  of  Deborah,  the  Dirge  of  David 
over  Saul  and  Jonathan,  and  the  later  Blessing  of 
Jacob  and  that  of  Moses,  and  a  few  other  poems  that 
might  be  named,  that  we  cannot  avoid  remarking  that 
had  the  Hebrews  preserved  all  that  they  produced  in 
the  way  of  poetry,  the  task  of  reproducing  their  past 
would  be  immeasurably  easier  than  it  is.  The  few 
fragments  which  we  have  reveal  much.  The  war- 
ode  of  Deborah,  than  which  there  is  probably  none 
in  any  literature  superior,  is  itself  a  storehouse  of 
invaluable  data.  With  a  few  score  of  such  poems, 
which  the  Hebrews  once  possessed  in  oral  if  not  in 
written  form,  we  should  find  it  as  easy  to  reconstruct 
the  actual  life  of  this  people  as  we  do  in  the  case 
of  the  early  Greeks.  But  this  was  not  to  be.  With 
such  materials  as  we  have  we  must  reconstruct,  get¬ 
ting  hints  from  now  a  word,  now  an  allusion,  now 
an  ancient  custom  wrhich  is  incidentally  mentioned; 
until  we  come  to  the  chronicles,  which,  rich  as  they 
are  in  the  material  they  give,  can  never  make  good 
to  us  the  loss  of  the  old  poetry  which  sprang  out  of 
the  very  life  of  the  people,  and  must,  if  we  may 
judge  from  the  few  fragments  of  it  which  remain, 
have  been  warm  with  the  blood  of  their  throbbing 
hearts.  If  in  this  labour  of  reconstructing  the  social 


230  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


life  of  the  Hebrews  of  those  times,  this  volume  shall 
prove  to  have  helped,  a  labour  which  has  been  in¬ 
creasingly  a  delight  as  the  months  have  passed,  will 
be  a  joy  even  in  retrospect  despite  the  certainty  of 
almost  daily  discovery  of  the  need  of  correction  or 
of  revision  at  some  point. 


APPENDIX 


I 

HARMONY  OF  PASSAGES  RELATING  TO  THE 

SETTLEMENT 

THE  FIRST  MIGRATION 

The  Settlement  of  the  Southern  Highlands  and  the  Negeb 
Judges  i.  1-7 


(And  it  came  to  pass  after 
the  death  of  Joshua) 1  that 
the  children  of  Israel  in¬ 
quired  of  Yahweh,  saying  : 
Who  shall  go  up  first  against 
the  Canaanites,  to  fight 
against  them?  And  Yah- 
weh  answered  :  Judah  shall 
go  up  ;  behold,  I  will  give 
the  land  into  his  hand.  And 
Judah  said  unto  Simeon  his 
brother  :  Go  up  with  me 
into  my  lot,  that  we  may 
make  war  against  the  Ca¬ 
naanites  ;  and  then  I  will  go 
with  you  into  your  lot. 
So  Simeon  went  with  him. 
And  Judah  went  up  ;  and 

1  The  parts  enclosed  belong 
to  late  editors.  See  Moore, 
Judges ,  Polychrome. 


Compare  with  this  the 
wonderful  story  as  told  in 
Joshua  x.  1-14,  which  be¬ 
longs  to  P,  and  has,  there¬ 
fore,  as  a  late  narrative,  lit¬ 
tle,  if  any,  foundation  in 
fact. 


231 


232 


APPENDIX 


Yahweh  delivered  the  Ca- 
naanites  (and  the  Perizzites 
into  their  hand  :  and  they 
smote  of  them  in  Bezek  ten 
thousand  men).  And  they 
found  Adoni-bezek  in  Bezek: 
and  they  fought  against 
him,  and  they  smote  the 
Canaanites  (and  the  Periz¬ 
zites).  And  Adoni-bezek 
fled  ;  and  they  pursued  after 
him,  and  caught  him,  and 
cut  off  his  thumbs  and  his 
great  toes.  And  Adoni-be¬ 
zek  said:  Seventy  kings, 
having  their  thumbs  and 
their  great  toes  cut  off, 
gathered  their  meat  under 
my  table  :  as  I  have  done, 
so  God  hath  requited  me. 
And  they  brought  him  to 
Jerusalem,  and  he  died 
there. 

Judges  i.  8 

(And  the  children  of  Ju¬ 
dah  fought  against  Jerusa¬ 
lem,  and  took  it,  and  smote 
it  with  the  edge  of  the 
sword,  and  destroyed  the 
city  with  fire.) 


Joshua  xv.  63 

And  as  for  the  Jebusites, 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusa¬ 
lem,  the  children  of  Judah 
could  not  drive  them  out : 
but  the  Jebusites  dwelt  with 
the  children  of  Judah  at 
Jerusalem,  unto  this  day. 


Judges  i.  21 

And  the  children  of  Benjamin  did  not  drive  out  the 
Jebusites  that  inhabited  Jerusalem ;  but  the  Jebusites 
dwelt  with  the  children  of  Benjamin,  in  Jerusalem,  unto 
this  day. 


APPENDIX 


233 


Judges  i.  9 

And  afterward  the  children  of  Judah  went  down  to  fight 
against  the  Canaanites  that  dwelt  in  the  highlands,  and  in 
the  South  (and  in  the  Shephelah). 


Judges  i.  17-19 

And  Judah  went  with  Simeon  his  brother,  and  they 
smote  the  Canaanites  that  inhabited  Zephath,  and  utterly 
destroyed  it.  And  the  name  of  the  city  was  called  Hormah. 
(Also  Judah  took  Gaza  with  the  border  thereof,  and  Aske- 
lon,  with  the  border  thereof,  and  Ekron  with  the  border 
thereof. ) 

And  Yahweh  was  with  Judah  ;  and  he  drove  out  the  in¬ 
habitants  of  the  highlands  ;  for  he  could  not  drive  out  the 
inhabitants  of  the  plain,  because  they  had  iron  chariots. 


Judges  i.  10,  20,  11-15 

(And  Judah  went  against 
the  Canaanites  that  dwelt 
in  Hebron :  now  the  name 
of  Hebron  beforetime  was 
Kiriath-arba : )  and  they 
smote  Hebron  and  gave  it 
unto  Caleb,  as  Moses  had 
spoken  :  and  he  drove  out 
thence  the  three  sons  of 
Anak,  Sheshai,  and  Ahiman, 
and  Talmai.  And  from 
thence  he  went  up  against 
the  inhabitants  of  Debir. 
Now  the  name  of  Debir  be¬ 
foretime  was  Kiriath-sepher. 
And  Caleb  said  :  He  that 
smiteth  Kiriath-sepher,  and 
taketh  it,  to  him  will  I  give 
Achsah  my  daughter  to 


Joshua  xv.  14-19 

And  Caleb  drove  out 
thence  the  three  sons  of 
Anak,  Sheshai,  and  Ahiman, 
and  Talmai,  the  sons  of 
Anak.  And  he  went  up 
thence  against  the  inhabi¬ 
tants  of  Debir :  now  the 
name  of  Debir  beforetime 
was  Kiriath-sepher.  And 
Caleb  said  :  He  that  smiteth 
Kiriath-sepher,  and  taketh 
it,  to  him  will  I  give  Achsah 
my  daughter  to  wife.  And 
Othniel  the  son  of  Kenaz, 
the  brother  of  Caleb,  took 
it  :  and  he  gave  him  Achsah 
his  daughter  to  wife.  And 
it  came  to  pass,  when  she 
came  unto  him,  that  he 


234 


APPENDIX 


wife.  And  Othniel  the  son 
of  Kenaz,  Caleb’s  younger 
brother,  took  it :  and  he 
gave  him  Achsah  his  daugh¬ 
ter  to  wife.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  when  she  came  unto 
him,  that  he  moved  her  to 
ask  of  her  father  a  field  : 
and  she  lighted  from  off  her 
ass ;  and  Caleb  said  unto 
her  :  What  wouldst  thou  ? 
And  she  said  unto  him : 
Give  me  a  present ;  for  thou 
hast  set  me  in  the  land  of 
the  South,  give  me  also 
springs  of  water.  And  Ca¬ 
leb  gave  her  the  upper 
springs  and  the  nether 
springs. 


moved  her  to  ask  of  her  fa¬ 
ther  a  field  :  and  she  lighted 
down  from  off  her  ass  ;  and 
Caleb  said  unto  her  :  What 
wouldst  thou  ?  And  she  said : 
give  me  a  present  ;  for  that 
thou  hast  set  me  in  the  land 
of  the  South,  give  me  also 
springs  of  water.  And  he 
gave  her  the  upper  springs 
and  the  nether  springs. 


Judges  i.  16 


And  Hobab  the  Kenite,  Moses’  brother-in-law,  went  up 
out  of  the  city  of  palm-trees  with  the  children  of  Judah 
into  the  wilderness  of  Judah,  which  is  in  the  south  of 
Arad ;  and  he  went  and  dwelt  with  Amalek.  And  the 
border  of  the  Edomites 1  was  from  the  ascent  of  Akrabbim, 
from  the  rock  and  upward. 


THE  SECOND  MIGRATION 
The  Settlement  of  the  Central  Highlands 
Judges  i.  22-26 

And  the  house  of  Joseph,  (Compare  with  this  simple 
they  also  went  up  against  story  the  more  fanciful  one 
Bethel  :  and  Yahweh  was  found  in  Joshua  viii.  1-29. 

1  This  emendation  of  the  text  suggested  by  Dr.  Moore  is  un¬ 
doubtedly  correct. 


APPENDIX 


235 


with  them.  And  the  house 
of  Joseph  sent  to  spy  out 
Bethel.  (Now  the  name  of 
the  city  was  beforetime  Luz.) 
And  the  watches  saw  a  man 
come  forth  out  of  the  city, 
and  they  said  unto  him : 
Show  us,  we  pray  thee,  the 
entrance  into  the  city,  and  we 
will  deal  kindly  with  thee. 
And  he  shewed  them  the 
entrance  into  the  city,  and 
they  smote  the  city  with  the 
edge  of  the  sword  ;  but  they 
sent  away  the  man  and  all 
of  his  family.  And  the  man 
went  into  the  land  of  the 
Hittites,  and  built  a  city, 
and  called  the  name  thereof 
Luz ;  which  is  the  name 
thereof  unto  this  day. 

Judges  i.  27,  26 

And  Manasseh  did  not 
drive  out  the  inhabitants  of 
Beth-shean  and  her  depen¬ 
dencies,  nor  the  inhabitants 
of  Taanach  and  her  depen¬ 
dencies,  nor  the  inhabitants 
of  Dor  and  her  dependen¬ 
cies,  nor  the  inhabitants  of 
Ibleam  and  her  dependen¬ 
cies,  nor  the  inhabitants 
of  Megiddo  and  her  depen¬ 
dencies  :  but  the  Canaan- 
ites  stubbornly  dwelt  in 
that  country.  And  it  came 


Notice  also  as  a  supplement 
of  the  Judges  story  Joshua 
xvii.  14-18.) 


Joshua  xvii.  11-13 

And  Manasseh  had  in  Is- 
sachar  and  in  Asher  Beth- 
shean  and  her  dependencies, 
and  Ibleam  and  her  depen¬ 
dencies,  and  the  inhabitants 
of  Dor  and  her  dependencies, 
and  the  inhabitants  of  En- 
dor  and  her  dependencies, 
and  the  inhabitants  of  Taan¬ 
ach  and  her  dependencies, 
and  the  inhabitants  of  Me¬ 
giddo  and  her  dependencies, 
even  the  three  heights.  Yet 
the  children  of  Manasseh 


2  3Q 


APPENDIX 


to  pass,  when  Israel  was 
waxen  strong,  that  they  put 
the  Canaanites  to  task-work, 
and  did  not  utterly  drive 
them  out. 


Judges  i.  29 

And  Ephraim  drove  not 
out  the  Canaanites  that 
dwelt  in  Gezer ;  but  the 
Canaanites  dwelt  in  Gezer 
among  them. 

The  Migrations  and 

Judges  i.  34,  35 

And  the  Amorites  forced 
the  children  of  Dan  into  the 
highlands  :  for  they  would 
not  suffer  them  to  come 
down  into  the  plain  :  but 
the  Amorites  stubbornly 
dwelt  in  Mount  Heres,  in 
Aijalon,  and  in  Shaalbim  : 
yet  the  hand  of  the  house  of 
Joseph  prevailed,  so  that 
they  became  tributary. 


could  not  drive  out  the  in¬ 
habitants  of  those  cities ; 
but  the  Canaanites  stubborn¬ 
ly  dwelt  in  the  land.  And 
it  came  to  pass  when  the 
children  of  Israel  were  wax¬ 
en  strong,  that  they  put  the 
Canaanites  to  task-work, 
and  did  not  utterly  drive 
them  out. 

Joshua  xvi.  10 

And  they  (i.e.,  Ephraim) 
drove  not  out  the  Canaan¬ 
ites  that  dwelt  in  Gezer : 
but  the  Canaanites  dwelt  in 
the  midst  of  Ephraim  unto 
this  day. 

Settlement  of  Dan 

(Joshua  xix.  47  has  a 
brief  account  of  the  settle¬ 
ment  of  Dan  in  the  North  at 
Leshem,  i.e.>  Laish.  Com¬ 
pare  this  with  Judges  xviii.) 


APPENDIX 


237 


THE  THIRD  MIGRATION 
The  Settlement  of  the  North 

Judges  i.  30-33 

Zebulun  drove  not  out  the  inhabitants  of  Kitron,  nor  the 
inhabitants  of  Nahalol  ;  but  the  Canaanites  dwelt  among 
them,  and  became  tributary. 

Asher  drove  not  out  the  inhabitants  of  Acco,  nor  the  in¬ 
habitants  of  Zidon,  nor  of  Ahlab,  nor  of  Achzib,  nor  of 
Helbah,  nor  of  Aphik,  nor  of  Rehob  :  but  the  Asherites 
dwelt  among  the  Canaanites,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  : 
for  they  did  not  drive  them  out. 

Naphtali  drove  not  out  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-shemesh, 
nor  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-anath  ;  but  dwelt  among  the 
Canaanites,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  ;  nevertheless  the 
inhabitants  of  Beth-shemesh  and  of  Beth-anath  became  tri¬ 
butary  unto  them. 

The  Canaanites  Unexterminated 
Judges  ii.  23 

So  Yahweh  left  these  peoples,  not  dispossessing  them  at 
once,  neither  delivered  he  them  into  the  hand  of  Joshua. 

Judges  iii.  1,  2 

Now  these  are  the  peoples  which  Yahweh  left,  to  prove 
Israel  by  them  (even  as  many  as  had  not  known  the  wars  of 
Canaan — only  that  the  generations  of  the  children  of  Is¬ 
rael  might  know),  to  teach  them  war,  at  the  least  such  as 
beforetime  knew  nothing  thereof. 

Judges  iii.  5,  6 

So  the  children  of  Israel  dwelt*  among  the  Canaanites — 
and  they  took  of  their  daughters  to  be  their  wives,  and  gave 
them  their  own  daughters  to  their  sons,  and  served  their 
gods. 


238 


APPENDIX 


II 

THE  MATRIARCHATE 

The  question  whether  the  matriarch  ate  preceded  the  for¬ 
mation  of  the  family  (polygamous  or  monogamous)  among 
primitive  peoples  generally  is  a  larger  question  than  we 
care  to  discuss  in  this  volume.  We  can  only  refer  to  the 
works  of  such  anthropologists  or  sociologists  as  have  given 
special  attention  to  this  perplexing  problem.  Says  A.  H . 
Keane,  in  his  recent  volume,  Man ,  Past  and  Present,  p.  6  f : 
‘  ‘  In  the  clan  system  descent  was  probably  reckoned  at  first 
only  through  the  female  line  ;  consequently  uterine  ties 
alone  constituted  kinship — the  father  not  being  considered 
related  to  his  own  children  or  a  member  of  the  family.  ’  ’ 
But  in  other  passages  this  same  student  admits  that  the 
contrary  may  have  been  true  ;  he  even  suggests  that  the 
problem  belongs  to  the  sociologists  rather  than  to  his  own 
peculiar  province,  that  of  anthropology. 

When,  however,  we  pass  to  Semitic  peoples  we  find  the 
weight  of  evidence  is  in  favour  of  the  matriarchate  as  the 
primitive  form  of  society.  The  data  presented  by  W.  Rob¬ 
ertson  Smith  in  his  Kinship  and  Marriage ,  point  this 
way  ;  though  the  said  data,  it  must  be  admitted,  are  far 
from  being  primitive  data.  More  conclusive  are  certain 
facts  that  appear  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  sources.  The  sa- 
diqa  marriages,  marriages  in  which  women  remained  with 
their  clan  and  reared  children  thereto,  must  not  be  over¬ 
looked.  Then  there  is  the  fact  that  the  harlot  in  ancient 
Israel,  as  among  other  Semitic  peoples,  had  some  social  posi¬ 
tion  which  points  in  the  same  direction.  The  persistence 
of  old  customs  among  such  a  people  is  generally  recognised. 
The  harlot  having  a  tent  or  home  of  her  own  into  which 
she  received  her  lovers  without  incurring  the  disfavour  of 
her  clan,  was  a  survival  of  the  age  of  the  matriarchate. 
Such  women  as  Rahab  and  Delilah  are  mentioned  naturally 
as  a  legitimate  part  of  the  social  life  of  their  people.  And 


APPENDIX 


239 


what  was  characteristic  of  the  Canaanites  here  appears  to 
have  been  true  of  the  Hebrews  themselves.  Even  at  a  much 
later  day  certain  of  the  patriarchs  are  mentioned  as  going 
in  to  harlots  with  no  suggestion  that  they  incurred  the 
disfavour  of  the  social  body  of  which  they  were  a  part  by 
doing  so. 


Ill 

THE  PHILISTINES 

According  to  Amos  ix.  7  the  Philistines  came  from  Caph- 
tor  (cf.  Deut.  ii.  23),  i.  e. ,  as  is  now  supposed  Crete.  In  the 
time  of  Rameses  III.,  the  Pursta,  or  Pulsta  (the  Philistines), 
made  their  way  into  Northern  Egypt,  only  to  be  repulsed 
and  turned  up  the  seaboard  of  Western  Palestine.  That 
they  seem  to  have  emigrated  from  the  south  appears  from 
the  fact  that  all  but  one  (Askalon)  of  their  cities  were 
on  the  great  highways.  That  they  entered  the  land  of 
Canaan  from  the  southwest  about  the  time  the  Hebrews 
entered  from  the  east  is  thought  probable.  Because  they 
were  not  great  in  point  of  numbers  they  were  slow  in  get¬ 
ting  the  territory,  which  they  are  known  to  have  occupied 
in  the  days  of  Saul,  into  their  hands.  This  accounts  also 
for  their  letting  Israel  alone  until  near  the  close  of  the  pe¬ 
riod  of  the  Judges.  The  Tell-el-Amarna  letters  or  tablets 
have  no  mention  of  them.  This  accords  with  what  we  have 
already  noted.  If  they  slowly  spread  out,  incorporating 
many  of  the  Canaanites,  as  seems  probable,  they  were  ready 
to  give  Israel  trouble  at  the  close  of  the  days  of  the  Judges. 
Their  slow  progress  may  have  been  owing  to  their  being  har¬ 
ried  occasionally  by  Egypt.  George  Adam  Smith  thinks 
they  were  a  Semitic  people.  That  they  became  partly  Sem- 
itised  through  contact  with  the  Canaanites  and  other  Sem¬ 
ites  is  probable ;  but  that  they  belonged  originally  to  the  Ary¬ 
an  stock  is  also  probable.  A  large  number  of  Semitic  words 
among  their  proper  names  does  not  prove  more  than  this. 
They  reached  the  height  of  their  power  in  the  time  of  Saul, 


240 


APPENDIX 


and  did  much  to  increase  the  perplexity  in  which  he  passed 
his  years.  The  hegemony  of  Ephraim  was  broken  by  them, 
it  is  thought,  in  the  battle  of  Ebenezer,  as  later  Israel  was 
overwhelmed  at  Mount  Gilboa.  At  the  time  of  Saul’s 
death  David  held  Ziklag  as  a  vassal  of  the  Philistines. 
While  this  monarch  ruled  at  Hebron  he  was  not  strong 
enough  to  cope  with  these  enemies,  but  after  the  union  of 
the  tribes  he  quickly  humbled  them.  The  Philistines  were 
never  strong  enough  to  cope  successfully  with  a  united  Is¬ 
rael.  (See  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  vol.  xviii.,  pp.  174  f., 
755  if.;  xiii.,  p.  402  ;  xxi.,  p.  645  ;  Dillmann,  Genesis,  vol.  i.,  p. 
361  f. ;  Cornill,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,  p.  45  ;  George 
Adam  Smith,  Historical  Geog.  of  the  Holy  Land ,  etc. ) 


IY 

THE  HITTITES  (THE  KHITTIM) 

Anciently  there  dwelt  to  the  north  of  Syria,  between  the 
Orontes  and  the  Euphrates,  a  powerful,  warlike  people, 
known  to  the  Assyrians  as  the  Khatti,  to  the  Hebrews  as 
the  Khittim,  to  the  Egyptians  as  the  Khita.  That  a 
branch  of  this  people  existed  in  the  south  of  Palestine  long 
prior  to  the  days  of  the  settlement  by  the  Hebrews  may  be 
deemed  possible  but  not  probable.  Such  references  as  Gen. 
xv.  20  are  now  regarded  suspiciously  by  scholars.  Though 
Palestine  was  undoubtedly  oft  traversed  by  the  Khittim,  it 
was  not,  we  may  safely  conclude,  or  at  least  surmise,  colo¬ 
nised  by  them.  The  Khittim,  mentioned  as  early  as  the  six¬ 
teenth  century,  appear  to  have  been  powerful  as  late  as  the 
twelfth  century.  The  hostile  relations  which  existed  be¬ 
tween  them  and  the  Assyrians  account  for  the  frequent 
mention  of  them  by  the  latter.  They  were  not  Semites ; 
they  appear  to  have  been  of  rougher,  sturdier,  northern 
stock.  With  Egypt  they  were  often  on  unfriendly  terms. 
But  when  Rameses  II.  obtained  over  them  at  great  cost  a 
victory,  peace  was  brought  about,  and  the  marriage  of  the 


APPENDIX 


241 


daughter  of  the  King  of  the  Khittim  to  Rameses  cemented 
the  new  friendly  league.  There  is  nothing  to  suggest  that 
the  Khittim  played  any  part  in  Canaan  during  the  days  of 
the  Judges.  Their  relations  with  Egypt  seem  to  have  been 
such  as  to  forbid  it.  (See  Encyc.  Brit.,  vol.  xii.,  p.  25  if.; 
vol.  xxii.,  p.  822;  Hastings’  Dictionary,  vol.  ii.,  p.  390  ff. ; 
Dillmann,  Genesis,  vol.  i.,  p.  363  f.;  and  C.  R.  Conder,  The 
mttites.  This  last  work,  which  ought  to  be  our  leading  au¬ 
thority  on  the  Khittim,  etc.,  should  be  very  cautiously  used.) 


V 

THE  AMORITES 

In  the  E  and  D  documents  of  the  Hexateuch  the  term 
“  Amorites  ”  appears  to  be  the  common  one  in  use  to  des¬ 
ignate  the  pre-Israelitish  inhabitants  of  the  land  of  Canaan, 
in  the  territory  west  of  the  Jordan  ;  yet  even  in  these  doc¬ 
uments  the  term  “  Canaanites  ”  is  made  frequent  use  of  in 
speaking  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  lowlands  along  the  sea¬ 
board.  Frequently,  it  is  true,  the  Amorites  are  spoken  of  as 
the  people  ruled  by  Sihon  and  Og  east  of  the  Jordan.  In 
the  J  document  the  familiar  designation  of  the  pre-Israel- 
itish  inhabitants  of  Canaan  is  “Canaanites.”  Driver,  in 
his  commentary  on  Deuteronomy,  concludes  that  so  far 
as  can  be  judged  from  the  biblical  and  other  data  at  pres¬ 
ent  at  our  disposal,  that  Canaan,  before  it  came  into  the 
possession  of  the  Israelites,  must  have  been  occupied  prin¬ 
cipally  by  two  tribes — the  Amorites  and  the  Canaanites — 
each  sufficiently  numerous  and  prominent  to  supply  a  des¬ 
ignation  of  the  entire  country  ;  the  former,  it  may  be  in¬ 
ferred,  resident  chiefly  in  the  high  central  ground  of  Pales¬ 
tine,  and  the  latter  chiefly  in  the  lower  districts  on  the 
west  and  east.  From  a  survey  of  the  passages  quoted,  it 
appears,  further,  that,  as  Wellhausen  remarks,  while  the 
Canaanites  are  often  alluded  to  as  still  resident  in  the  land 
in  the  age  of  the  biblical  writer  especially  in  the  cities  of 


242 


APPENDIX 


the  plains  not  conquered  by  the  Israelites,  the  Amorites 
are  usually  referred  to  as  the  past  population  of  Canaan, 
expelled  by  the  Israelites,  and  as  such  are  invested  with 
semi -mythical  attributes,  and  described  as  giants.  This  is 
putting  it  quite  as  strongly  as  the  facts  now  known  war¬ 
rant  us  in  doing,  for  even  Amos  (ii.  9  f.)  uses  the  term 
“Amorites,”  as  does  E,  as  a  general  term  for  the  primitive 
population  of  Canaan.  Winckler  thinks  that  according  to 
the  Amarna  letters  the  Canaanite  inhabitants  were  in  the 
coasts  and  the  Amorites  in  the  interior.  While  we  may 
admit  this,  which  accords  substantially  with  the  thought 
of  Driver  and  Wellhausen,  we  may  also  contend  that  the 
Canaanites  probably,  though  distinct  from  the  Amorites, 
crowded  up  in  the  richer  regions  among  the  hills.  That 
there  was  a  people  known  as  Amorites  seems  unquestion¬ 
able  ;  but  that  they  were  often  confounded  by  late  narra¬ 
tors  with  the  Canaanites  seems  also  unquestionable.  (See 
Eneyc.  Brit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  747  ;  vol.  iv.,  p.  763  ;  vol.  xiii.,  p. 
397 ;  vol.  xvi.,  p.  533  ;  Driver,  Deuteronomy,  p.  11  f.; 
Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.,  vol.  i.,  c.  146  f. ;  Hastings’ 
Dictionary,  vol.  i.,  p.  84  ff.) 


VI 

THE  SPIRIT  OF  YAHWEH 

The  phrase  “spirit  of  Yahweh  ”  often  appeared  in  the 
literature  of  this  period.  It  must  have  been  with  even 
greater  frequency  upon  the  tongues  of  the  people,  for  all 
men  who  accomplished  deeds  of  unusual  prowess,  or  who 
manifested  peculiar  skill  in  the  arts,  were  thought  of  as 
possessed  by  this  spirit.  He  who  was  seized  by  it  was  in 
a  sort  of  demonic  fury,  a  divine  rage.  Unusual  enthusi¬ 
asm,  such  as  would  enable  a  man  to  rise  above  his  ordinary 
level  of  performance,  was  enough  to  suggest  it.  Whatever 
seemed  to  transcend  the  limits  of  man’s  own  sagacity  and 
strength  was  attributed,  says  G.  F.  Moore,  “to  the  energy 


APPENDIX 


243 


of  the  spirit  of  Yahweh,  the  genius  of  the  artist,  the  inspi¬ 
ration  of  the  poet,  the  frenzy  of  the  prophets  and  their  rev¬ 
elations,  and  extraordinary  feats  of  any  kind.”  This  spirit 
came  upon  Gideon  (Judges  vi.  34),  upon  Jephthah  (Judges 
xi.  29),  upon  Samson  (Judges  xiii.  25  ;  xiv.  6,  19  ;  xv.  14), 
upon  Saul  (1  Samuel  x.  10  ;  xi.  6,  etc.).  (See  Kautzsch, 
Literature  of  the  Old  Testament ,  p.  23  ;  Moore,  Judges ,  I.  C ., 
pp.  87  f.,  197,  298  ;  H.  P.  Smith,  Samuel,  I.  C.,  pp.  68,  145.) 


VII 

THE  PATRIARCHAL  STORIES  OF  GENESIS 

It  is  somewhat  aside  from  the  main  purpose  of  this  vol¬ 
ume  to  discuss  the  larger  question  of  the  historicity  of 
Genesis,  or  the  lesser  one  of  the  character  of  the  patriarchal 
narratives.  There  is  considerable  difference  of  opinion 
among  scholars,  some  still  accepting  as  probable  a  consid¬ 
erable  basis  of  fact  in  these  stories,  others,  and  the  number 
seems  to  be  increasing,  holding  the  contrary  view.  The 
following  statement  by  Budde,  The  Religion  of  Israel  to  - 
the  Exile ,  will  meet  with  hearty  response  on  the  part  of 
many  :  “For  the  patriarchs  are,  in  reality,  nothing  more 
than  the  ideal  reflection  of  the  nation  Israel  thrown  back 
into  the  past — Israel  as  it  should  have  been  in  hoary  an¬ 
tiquity.  No  nation  knows  the  actual  father  from  whom  it 
takes  its  origin ;  for  nations  never  arise  by  derivation  from 
the  same  father,  but  by  the  aggregation  of  clans  and  tribes. 
The  realisation  of  these  facts,  to  be  sure,  deprives  the  whole 
story  of  the  patriarchs  of  historicity  in  the  narrower  sense, 
but  not  of  historical  value,  still  less  of  inner  worth  and 
psychological  truth.  ” 

One  thing  which  we  should  not  overlook  is  the  fact  that 
the  literature  of  the  period  we  considered  in  Part  I.  of  this 
volume,  a  literature  covering  two  and  a  half  or  three  centu¬ 
ries,  which  consists  of  portions  of  Joshua,  and  most  of  Judges 
and  1  Samuel,  contains  even  in  its  present  form  only 


244 


APPENDIX 


two  passages  in  which  the  patriarchs  are  mentioned — Josh, 
xxiv.  2,  3,  4,  32,  and  1  Sam.  xii.  8.  The  latter  passage  may¬ 
be  dismissed  as  it  refers  to  Jacob  as  a  people,  a  term  used 
frequently  in  the  later  literature  much  as  the  term  Israel 
appears  to  have  been.  The  verses  in  Joshua  xxiv.  read  as 
follows:  “And  Joshua  said  unto  all  the  people,  Thus 
saith  the  Lord,  the  God  of  Israel,  Your  fathers  dwelt  of  old 
time  beyond  the  River,  even  Terah,  the  father  of  Abraham, 
and  the  father  of  Nahor  :  and  they  served  other  gods. 
And  I  took  your  father  Abraham  from  beyond  the  River, 
and  led  him  throughout  all  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  mul¬ 
tiplied  his  seed,  and  gave  him  Isaac.  And  I  gave  unto 
Isaac  Jacob  and  Esau  :  and  I  gave  unto  Esau  Mount  Seir, 
to  possess  it ;  and  Jacob  and  his  children  went  down  into 
Egypt.  .  .  .  And  the  bones  of  Joseph,  which  the  children 
of  Israel  brought  up  out  of  Egypt,  buried  they  in  Shechem, 
in  the  parcel  of  ground  which  Jacob  bought  of  the  sons  of 
Hamor  the  father  of  Shechem,  for  an  hundred  pieces  of 
money  :  and  they  became  the  inheritance  of  the  children  of 
Joseph.”  But  this  chapter  belongs  unquestionably  not  to 
the  contemporary  literature,  but  to  a  late  narrator,  prob¬ 
ably  E,  or  a  redactor  of  E,  who  reminds  us  of  the  Deuter- 
onomists.  For  historical  purposes  it  is  well  nigh  worth¬ 
less.  It  is  significant  that  in  the  folk-stories  and  songs  of 
these  centuries,  so  far  as  they  have  come  down  to  us,  we 
have  no  mention  of  any  patriarchs.  The  only  reasonable 
conclusion  is  that  there  were  no  such  men  known  to  the 
Hebrew  clans  of  the  time.  To  the  centuries  back  of  their 
Egyptian  sojourn  they  were  unable  to  go  in  thought. 

Premising,  then,  that  there  were  none,  because  the  con¬ 
temporary  literature  is  silent,  we  go  farther  and  note  how 
such  stories  as  those  which  have  to  do  with  Abraham  and 
other  of  the  patriarchs  sprang  up  in  Israel  during  the  mon¬ 
archy.  As  the  Hebrews  endeavoured  to  idealise  their  past, 
to  tell  the  story  of  their  servitude  in  Egypt,  or  of  their  con¬ 
flicts  and  their  covenants  with  the  Philistines,  and  espe¬ 
cially  as  their  reformers  set  themselves  to  purify  the  old 


APPENDIX 


245 


Canaanitish  sanctuaries  of  the  lewd  worship  of  the  Baalim, 
they  made  use  of  this  form  of  literature.  Take,  for  exam¬ 
ple,  the  latter  case.  By  representing  their  supposed  progen¬ 
itors  as  journeying  through  Canaan,  as  building  altars, 
and  worshipping  Yahweh  at  Bethel,  Beersheba,  etc.,  they 
could  hallow  these  old  sanctuaries  in  the  eyes  of  the  peo¬ 
ple.  It  was  not,  we  need  to  remember,  until  the  law  of 
Deuteronomy,  promulgated  in  the  days  of  Josiah,  discred¬ 
ited  these  high  places  that  any  determined  effort  was  made 
to  abolish  them.  Pre-Deuteronomic  reformers  at  the  most 
sought  only  to  purify  them.  So  admirably  has  Professor  B. 
W.  Bacon,  in  an  article  on  Abraham,  the  Heir  of  Yahweh , 
done  his  work  that  it  is  enough  here  to  call  attention  to  it.  * 


VIII 

PRIMITIVE  COVENANTS  AMONG  SEMITIC 

PEOPLE 

“  The  very  idea  of  a  ‘  covenant  ’  in  primitive  thought,” 
says  Henry  Clay  Trumbull,  D.D.,  in  one  of  his  three  val¬ 
uable  works  on  the  subject,  “  is  a  union  of  being,  or  of  per¬ 
sons,  in  a  common  life,  with  the  approval  of  God,  or  the 
gods.  This  was  primarily  a  sharing  of  blood,  which  is  life, 
between  two  persons,  through  a  rite  which  had  the  sanc¬ 
tion  of  him  who  is  the  source  of  all  life.  In  this  sense 
‘  blood  brotherhood  ’  and  the  ‘  threshold  covenant  ’  are  but 
different  forms  of  one  and  the  same  covenant.  The  blood 
of  animals  shared  in  a  common  sacrifice  is  counted  as  the 
blood  which  makes  two  one  in  a  sacred  covenant.  Wine 
as  *  the  blood  of  the  grape  ’  stands  for  the  blood  which  is 
the  life  of  all  flesh;  hence  the  sharing  of  wine  stands  for 
the  sharing  of  blood  or  life.  So,  again,  salt  represents 

1  The  New  World ,  vol.  viii. ,  p.  674  ff.  ;  cf.,  however,  the  article 
on  Abraham ,  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyc.  Bib.  (T.  K.  C.),  vol.  i. ,  c. 
23  ff. 


246 


APPENDIX 


blood,  or  life,  and  the  covenant  of  salt  is  simply  another 
form  of  the  one  blood  covenant.”  Equally  worthy  of  note 
are  his  words  concerning  marriage  as  a  covenant  :  “True 
marriage  is  thus  a  covenant,  instead  of  an  arrangement. 
The  twain  become  no  longer  two,  but  one  ;  each  is  given 
to  the  other  ;  their  separate  identity  is  lost  in  their  com¬ 
mon  life.  A  ring,  a  bracelet,  a  band,  has  been  from  time 
immemorial  the  symbol  and  pledge  of  such  an  indissoluble 
union.” 

There  are  occasional  references  in  the  period  under  con¬ 
sideration  to  covenants  between  individuals,  as  that  be¬ 
tween  Jonathan  and  David  (1  Sam.  xviii.  2  and  xxii.  16  ff.) 
and  that  at  the  beginning  of  the  period  of  the  monarchy 
between  Abner  and  David  (2  Samuel  iii.  12  ff.).  It  is  possi¬ 
ble  that  the  very  frequency  of  such  covenants  between  in¬ 
dividuals  may  in  part  account  for  the  mention  of  so  few. 
Most  of  the  stories  of  early  covenants  in  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment,  in  which  individuals  figure  prominently,  were  in 
reality  covenants  between  peoples,  as  in  Gen.  xxvi.  26  ff.  the 
covenant  was  between  Israel  and  the  Philistines.  This  is 
according  to  J.  The  similar  story,  in  Gen.  xxi.  22  ff.  is  in 
the  E  document  of  the  Hexateuch.  So  in  the  narrative  of 
the  covenant  between  Jacob  and  Laban,  Gen.  xxxi.  44  ff., 
where  a  cairn  was  reared  as  a  witness  and  landmark,  the 
covenant  was  in  fact  between  the  Hebrews  and  the  Ara¬ 
maeans.  According  to  Ex.  xxiii.  32  (cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  10-17)  in 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  which  was  posterior  to  the  time 
of  the  Judges,  the  Hebrews  were  told  not  to  make  a  cov¬ 
enant  with  the  Canaanites.  But  that  they  repeatedly  cov¬ 
enanted  with  them  as  they  settled  the  land,  and  during 
the  immediately  following  centuries,  cannot  reasonably  be 
doubted. 


INDEX 


Abigail,  83-85 

Abimelech,  story  of,  11 ;  birth  of, 

25 ;  slays  his  brothers,  40,  91  ; 
usurps  authority,  48 ;  death,  33, 

158;  influence,  57 
Abner,  122 

Abraham,  35,  129,  212 
Absalom,  son  of  a  foreign  mother, 

113  ;  rebellion,  122 ;  monument, 

206 

Adonijah,  194,  212 
Adultery,  187 

Agriculture,  early,  69 ;  social  char¬ 
acter,  69,  87,  88 ;  progress  in, 
145-147 

Ahab,  uses  sheiks,  167,  193,  194; 
secures  death  of  Naboth,  185, 

193,  194 
Ahijah,  200 

Ahimaas,  a  long  distance  runner, 

182 

Altars,  rock,  42,  212 ;  construc¬ 
tion,  191 ;  places  of  slaughter, 

43  n.,  63  ;  places  of  asylum,  194 
Altruism,  176 
Amalekites,  16, 17,  21,  192 
Ammonites,  trouble  Israel,  21 ;  in¬ 
vest  Jabesh-Gilead,  61  ;  war  with 
Judah,  154,  157 ;  subdued  by 
Northern  Kingdom,  114 ;  treat¬ 
ment  of  David’s  envoys,  170 
Amorites,  111 ;  Ap.  V 
Amos,  8,  109,  110,  140,  165,  166, 

196,  197,  208,  218,  219,  222,  224 
Animism,  39 

247 


Anklets,  156 

Anthropomorphisms,  21.1 
Apoplexy,  85,  201 
Aqueducts,  143 

Arabs,  social  life  of,  24 ;  harlots, 
26 ;  poetry,  36  n. 

Architecture,  133,  134,  149 
Ark,  as  seat  of  Yahweh,  11,  95, 
112 ;  captured,  97 ;  in  battle, 
119,  120,  155 
Armour,  155,  156,  158 
Army,  standing,  123,  153,  154 ; 
levies  for,  153 ;  organisation,  155 ; 
commissariat,  158 ;  devastation 
wrought  by,  158 

Asher,  settlement  of,  19 ;  recreant, 
55 

Ass,  68,  69,  152 

Assyrians,  102,  114,  146,  153,  155 
Astarte,  88,  91,  107,  115,  216 
Authorities,  time  of  the  Judges, 
12,  13;  time  of  the  monarchy, 
103 

Baal,  baalim,  character  of,  46,  87, 
88 ;  proprietors  of  the  soil,  etc., 
88-90;  worshipped  by  the  He¬ 
brews,  90,  107,  111,  115,  216; 
traces  of,  in  Books  of  Samuel, 
217 

Babylonia,  princes  and  kings  as 
money-lenders,  etc. ,  146 ;  wives 
in,  132;  influence  upon  Hebrews, 
72,  115,  116,  168 
Balaam,  story  of,  108 


248 


INDEX 


Ban,  180,  212,  213 
Barak,  54,  55 
Bathsheba,  113 
Bears,  202 

Beasts,  injury  by,  189,  190  ;  injury 
to,  190;  killing  of,  190;  stray, 

190 

Beasts,  wild,  202 
Beauty,  sensitiveness  to,  140 
Beer-sheba,  104 
Beggars,  150 

Benjamin,  settlement  of,  17,  18; 
shattering  of,  28 ;  rape  of  the 
maidens  of  Shiloh,  34  ;  at  Gib- 
eah,  79,  80;  supports  Saul,  4, 
61,  62,  80,  122  ;  character  of, 
70 

Bethel,  89,  104 

Blessing  of  Jacob,  30,  31,  70,  71, 
106,  108,  125,  126,  229 
Blessing  of  Moses,  106,  173  n.,  229 
Blood,  offerings  of,  40,  43,  191 
Blood-revenge,  40,  119 
Blood-wite,  189,  190 
Body-guard  of  kings,  123,  154 
Bondage  in  Egypt,  6,  7,  96,  161 
Book  of  the  Covenant,  35,  40, 
108,  130,  164,  166,  175,  176,  183- 

191 

Borrowing,  186,  187 
Bowmen,  156 
Bride,  37,  131 

Bridegroom,  37  ;  tent  of,  131 

Calamities,  196,  197;  sent  by 
Yahweh,  209;  effects  upon  soci¬ 
ety,  198,  200 
Caleb,  192 

Calebites,  location  of,  17 ;  absorbed 
by  Judah,  102 

Canaan,  climate  of,  22;  location 
favorable  for  trade,  71 ;  people, 
18-21 ;  settled  by  the  Hebrews, 
3,  4,  15-22,  111,  112,  226 


Canaanites,  a  Semitic  people,  20; 
civilisation,  20,  22,  23;  religion, 
87-90;  not  exterminated,  11,  19, 
78, 111-113;  absorbed  by  the  He¬ 
brews,  11,  147 ;  neighbours  of, 
16,  17,  21,  22  ;  influence  upon  the 
Hebrews,  71,  91 
Captives,  170,  171 
Captivity,  of  North  Israel,  102 ;  of 
Judah,  228 
Caravans,  36,  70,  73 
Cataract,  200,  201 
Chariots,  154 

Children,  desired,  132,  133 ;  how 
instructed,  36,  167,  168 ;  pets 
and  games,  132 
Christ,  Jesus,  66,  109,  225 
Chronicles,  Books  of,  107,  217 
Chronology  of  the  Judges,  4,  5,  47 
Cisterns,  149 

Cities,  72,  73,  136-144;  sites,  141 ; 
defence,  142;  gates,  73, 143, 150; 
aqueducts,  143, 157 ;  sewage  dis¬ 
posal,  143,  144,  151 ;  life  in,  136- 
144,  171,  172 ;  how  recruited,  141 
City-dump,  144,  151 
Clan,  the,  priority  to  the  family, 
24 ;  organisation,  27,  37,  49 ;  as¬ 
semblies,  27 ;  heads  of,  48,  49, 
165;  domination  over  members, 
177  ;  loyalty  of  members,  73,  74 ; 
sacrificial  feasts,  43,  44 ;  in  cities, 
136;  in  warfare,  159;  passing 
of,  26,  119-127 

Colour,  local,  71,  81,  149,  150,  225, 

227 

Commercial  relations,  113 
Communal  offerings,  43 
Concubines,  35,  38,  79,  80,  129,  188 
Country  life,  139,  140 
Court,  the,  125,  204 
Covenants,  90,  193,  209,  Ap.  VIII 
Criminals,  how  dealt  with,  184-190 
Criticism,  higher,  5,  13 


INDEX 


249 


Curse,  scope  of,  178-180 
Cushites,  182,  185 
Customs,  old,  166, 172, 173, 176  n., 
177 

Dan,  settlement  of,  18;  migration, 
12,  75,  78;  recreant,  55;  char¬ 
acter,  70;  worship,  77,  78 
Dan  (city),  centre  of  old  Israelit- 
ish  life,  173 

David,  with  Saul,  63 ;  incurs  jeal¬ 
ousy  of  Saul,  63,  64 ;  outlaw,  27, 
63,  64 ;  pours  out  water,  41 ; 
choice  of  Samuel,  65;  relations 
with  Nabal,  83-85  ;  marries  Abi¬ 
gail,  85  ;  attempts  to  unite  Israel, 
98,  101,  117,  118;  foreign  re¬ 
lations,  111-113;  relations  to 
sheiks,  120 ;  remembered  by 
friends,  121 ;  throne  held  with 
difficulty,  122;  favours  Judah, 
101 ;  seasoned  soldiers,  123 ;  fam¬ 
ily,  129,  130;  neglect  of  judicial 
functions,  125,  181 ;  flight  from 
Jerusalem,  156 ;  at  Rabbath- 
Ammon,  157 ;  influence  of,  165, 
166;  writes  note,  167;  allows 
Gibeonites  to  be  avenged,  209, 
210  ;  uses  sacred  lot,  214,  215 
Death,  203,  204 
Deborah,  32,  33,  54,  55 
Decalogue,  184-190 
Demonic  fury,  51,  53,  56,  61,  Ap. 
VI 

Deutero-Isaiah,  8,  109 
Deuteronomists,  work  of,  9,  10  ; 
blood,  40 ;  knowledge  of  high 
places,  46,  105 ;  favour  a  cen¬ 
tral  sanctuary,  43,  46,  105 ;  in 
Books  of  Samuel,  104 ;  prag¬ 
matism  of,  in  the  Books  of 
Kings,  106,  107,  216  ;  conception 
of  the  past,  105, 106, 123  ;  curses, 
179,  180 ;  laws,  190-192 


Deuteronomy,  Book  of,  7,  17,  22, 
179,  185,  187,  198,  199 
Dirge  over  Saul  and  Jonathan, 
168,  205,  229 
Diseases,  200,  201 

Dogs,  as  scavengers,  144;  de¬ 
voured,  201,  202 
Door-keepers,  R3 
Dress,  148 

Drink  offerings,  39,  41,  211,  212 
Drink,  strong,  145 
Drunkenness,  134,  145,  174,  175, 
220,  222 

Earthquakes,  196,  197 
Edomites,  16,  17,  114,  154 
Education,  36,  161-168 
Egypt,  Hebrews  in,  6,  7,  15,  22, 
161,  162;  climate,  22;  conflict 
with  Hittites,  22;  place  of  ref¬ 
uge,  113  ;  influence  upon  the  He¬ 
brews,  72 

Ehud,  11,  55,  56,  112 
Eli,  64,  65 

Elijah,  Deuteronomist’s  view,  107; 
attempted  extradition,  114  ;  in¬ 
fluence,  165,  166 
Elisha,  210 
Elkanah,  129 
Endor,  witch  of,  185 
Environment  of  the  Hebrews  dur¬ 
ing  time  of  the  Judges,  15-23; 
during  time  of  the  monarchy, 
111-118 

Ephod-idol,  57,  75-78,  215 
Ephod,  linen,  215 
Ephraim,  settlement  of,  18,  19 ; 
supports  Ehud,  56 ;  supports 
Saul,  62;  purity  of,  173;  de¬ 
struction  of,  220 

Ephraimite  narrative  (Elohist  E), 
28  n.,  29  nM  128,  166;  Jethro,  17; 
Shechem  story,  29-31  ;  sacri¬ 
fice,  41,  42,  57  n.;  patriarchal 


250 


INDEX 


stories,  104 ;  Genesis,  Exodus 
and  Numbers,  7  n.,  108;  monog¬ 
amy  favoured,  128  ;  Moses’  mar¬ 
riage  with  a  Cushite,  185  ;  Book 
of  the  Covenant,  184  n.;  famine, 
197 ;  capture  of  the  Ark,  198, 
199 ;  time  of,  164 ;  character, 
173  n.,  218 

Exodus,  Book  of,  7,  10S,  164,  184- 
194,  212,  213 


Fabrics,  kinds  of,  147,  148 
Fads,  115,  116 
Fairs,  149 
Family,  Arab,  26 
Family,  Hebrew,  32-38,  128-135 
Family,  primitive,  24,  25,  26 
Famine,  197,  198 
Fathers,  36,  37,  132,  133 
Feasts,  37,  38,  44-46,  89,  149,  174, 
191,  212 

Fires,  setting  of,  187 
First-born,  133,  190 
Flesh,  unclean,  63 
Folk-tales,  9,  48,  66,  108,  109,  165, 
168 

Food,  38,  203,  204 
Foreign  relations,  113,  181 
Fornication,  186 
Foxes,  52 

Free  citizens  (sheiks),  119,  120, 
124,  177,  178, 181,  184,  192-194 

Gaal  ben  Obed,  11,  57 
Gad,  20 

Garments,  kinds  of,  148;  rending 
of,  204,  205 

Genesis,  J  and  E  narratives,  28, 
108,  197  ;  domestic  infelicity,  35, 
36  ;  treatment  of  women,  35,  36 ; 
sacrifice,  41, 42,  57 ;  incest  story, 
171  n.;  Shechem  story,  28-31  ; 
courtship  of  Rebekah,  85,  128- 


130;  patriarchal  stories,  15,  104, 
108,  128,  129,  Ap.  VII 
Gibeah,  inhospitality  of,  37,  78-81 ; 

outrage  of,  35,  66,  78-81 
Gibeonites,  193 

Gideon,  story  of,  11,  56,  57;  in¬ 
dustry  of,  38 ;  as  priest,  37 ; 
makes  Ephod-idol,  57 ;  his  sept, 
74 ;  influence,  47,  48, 

Gilgal,  16,  89 
Girdle,  148,  149 
God,  207 

Gods,  worship  of  false,  88,  89,  186, 
192 

Greece,  115,  228,  229 
Grief,  204,  205 

Had  ad,  113 
Hamorites,  28-31 
Hannah,  33,  174 
Hannah,  psalm  of,  106 
Hanun,  170 
Harlot,  24,  26,  27,  131 
Heat,  201 

Heat-prostration,  201 
Hebrews,  in  Egypt,  6,  7, 15,  22,  96, 
161,  162;  settlement  in  Canaan, 
3,  5,  6, 15-21,  226-228  ;  numbers, 
21  ;  growth,  22 ;  kinship  of,  3 ; 
wanting  in  unity,  3,  27,  28,  95- 
97 ;  social  intercourse  between 
clans,  68,  73 ;  as  nomads,  7,  8, 
15;  as  agriculturists,  16,  145; 
industrially  and  religiously  in¬ 
fluenced  by  Canaanites,  5,  22,  23, 
71,  72,  88,  89,  114;  covenants 
with  other  people,  90 ;  un¬ 
troubled  in  early  time,  22;  en¬ 
vironment  during  the  monarchy, 
111-118 ;  characteristics,  54,  73, 
74,  153,  172,  228 
Hebron,  104 

Hexateuch,  7,  28  n.,  29  n.,  34,  35, 
108,  115 


INDEX 


251 


High  places,  priests  of,  43 ;  wor¬ 
ship  at,  44-46,  175,  212;  feasts 
at,  60,  61,  212 ;  breeding  places 
of  disease,  200 ;  Deuteronomist’s 
conception  of,  46, 106,  107 ;  in  E, 
44  n. 

Highways,  68,  71,  151 
Hiram,  113 
Hittites,  -22,  Ap.  IV 
Hobab,  17 

Home,  in  time  of  the  Judges,  32- 
38 ;  in  the  time  of  the  monarchy, 
128-135;  furnishing,  134;  indus¬ 
tries,  36,  38,  148,  149;  life,  69; 
hospitality,  37 ;  character,  133, 
135  ;  influence,  135,  167,  168 
Horse,  152 

Hosea,  109, 110,  219,  224  ;  home  of, 
135 

Hospitality,  37,  46,  55,  71,  134, 
150,  170,  171 

Houses,  construction,  133,  137, 
142,  143;  in  cities,  142,  143; 
whitewashed,  149 
Humour,  Hebrew,  169,  170 
Husbands,  36,  37,  132 

Images,  worship  of,  57,  76-78,  92, 
94,  192 

Industry,  in  time  of  the  Judges, 
6S-74 ;  in  time  of  monarchy,  145- 
152 

Influence  of  individuals,  47,  66,  67 
Insanity,  201 
Interest,  187 

Isaiah,  8,  109,  110,  165,  208,  221, 
222,  224 

Ishbaal,  133,  217 
Issachar,  19,  54,  55 

Jabesh-Gilead,  61 
Jabin  of  Hazor,  11,  54 
Jacob,  28-31,  108,  129 
Jebusites,  17,  102 


Jehu,  210 

Jephthah,  story  of,  57,  58 ;  an  out¬ 
law,  27 ;  vow,  34 ;  sacrifice  of 
his  daughter,  34,  57,  58,  90 ;  as 
priest,  37 ;  influence,  48 
Jephthah,  daughter  of,  58,  213 
Jericho,  16 

Jeroboam  I.,  102,  113,  114 
Jeroboam  II. ,  102,  114,  134 
Jerusalem,  held  by  Jebusites,  17 ; 
taken  by  David,  98 ;  inhabitants, 
102 ;  location,  141  ;  not  impreg¬ 
nable,  156 
Jethro,  17 

Jezebel,  167,  194,  216 
Joab,  157,  184 
Job,  Book  of,  109 
Jonathan,  as  a  leader,  62 ;  as  taboo, 
62,  63  ;  dirge  over,  168,  205,  229 
Joseph,  his  economic  policy,  108 
Joshua,  21,  49,  50,  192 
Joshua,  Book  of,  10,  21,  108 
Judah,  settlement  of,  17  ;  position, 
18,  19,  101,  102,  126;  follows  not 
Saul,  61,  62 ;  relations  with 

Edomites,  114;  looks  to  David, 
123  ;  character,  71 ;  how  consti¬ 
tuted,  142,  171 ;  united  through 
war,  159 

Judahite  narrative  (Jehovist  J), 
28  n.,  29  n.,  128,  166;  Hobab  in, 
17 ;  story  of  Shechem,  28-31 ; 
Genesis,  28,  41,  42,  104,  108,  197 ; 
Exodus  and  Numbers,  7  n.,  108  ; 
Babylonian  influence,  115 ;  mo¬ 
nogamy,  128;  time,  161, 164;  cos¬ 
mogony,  211  ;  first-born,  213  n.  ; 
prophetic  character,  218,  223 
Judges,  Book  of,  4,  5,  9-12,  75, 
108,  109,  164 
Judges,  legal,  188 
Judges,  minor,  47 
Judges  (Vindicators),  58,  59,  165, 
177  ;  influence,  47,  48,  49-67,  96 


252 


INDEX 


Kadesh-barnea,  95,  108 
Kenites,  17,  102 

King,  how  named,  128  ;  court,  117, 
124,  125 ;  officers,  124 ;  body¬ 
guard,  154;  dress  in  battle,  155  ; 
estate,  146  ;  judge  and  law¬ 
maker,  125,  178-181 ;  priest,  180; 
chapel,  147;  reviling  of,  176, 
185 ;  criminals  dispatched  by, 
193  ;  prisoners  of,  194 
Kings,  Book  of,  106,  107,  216,  218 

Labour,  social  nature  of,  69 ; 
hand,  146,  147  ;  forced,  147,  151 ; 
royal,  146,  147 
Land,  how  held,  146,  226 
Lawless  men,  51,  150,  175 
Laws,  177-195;  origin,  177-183; 
infringement,  177-195;  capital 
offences,  183-186,  192 ;  minor  of¬ 
fences,  186-190 
Legal  affairs,  68,  177-195 
Levi,  shattering  of,  28-31 
Levites,  as  priests,  37,  43,  75-80, 
89;  under  the  Deuteronomists, 
43 

Life,  Hebrew  conception  of,  169 ; 
social  nature,  39-46,  69,  73,  74  ; 
industrious,  151 ;  security,  69-70, 
137,  138;  simple,  174;  joyous, 
92,  172,  228 
Lions,  51,  202 

Literature,  161-168 ;  as  revealing 
differences,  101 ;  oral,  168  ;  writ¬ 
ten,  161-165  ;  influence,  171 
Lot,  the  sacred,  76,  203,  214,  215 
Luxury,  134,  148,  174,  222 

Maidens,  at  city  gates,  143 
Manasseh,  settlement  of,  18,  19 
Manners,  169-172 
Manoah,  37,  50 
Manoah,  wife  of,  33 
Manslaughter,  186 


Manufactures,  72,  138,  139,  147, 
148 

Market-places,  143 
Marriage,  sadaqa ,  24,  25,  131,  Ap. 
II.;  customs,  25,  26,  37,  38,  130, 
131 ;  Dinah’s,  28-31 ;  Samson’s, 
51  ;  Rebekah’s,  85, 128, 129,  130  ; 
polygamous,  38,  83  n.,  129;  mo¬ 
nogamous,  128,  131 
Marriage  among  Arabs,  26 
Matriarcbate,  24,  Ap.  II 
Micah,  the  Ephraimite,  12,  75-78, 
214,  215 

Micah,  the  prophet,  109,  110,  140, 
208,  220,  221,  224 
Midianite3,  8,  17,  56,  57,  74 
Moabites,  21,  112,  114,  154 
Monarchy,  59,  101,  102,  116,  117, 
118,  120-122,  227 
Monogamy,  128-131 
Monuments,  206 

Morality,  Hebrew,  169-176,  218- 
222 ;  local  character  of,  153 ; 
outward  nature  of,  175,  176  ;  re¬ 
lations  to  Yahweh,  182,  183 
Moses,  185 
Mourners,  hired,  205 
Mules,  152 
Music,  61,  171,  172 

Naaman,  191 
Nabal,  81-85,  121,  201 
Naboth,  167,  185,  192,  193 
Naphtali,  19,  20,  54,  55 
Nationalism,  95-98 
Nazarite,  50,  51,  190 
Northern  Kingdom,  101,  102,  123, 
126,  142,  152, 159 


Oaths,  184 

Offences,  capital,  183-186,  192, 
194;  minor,  186-190 
Outlawry,  27,  70,  83-85 


INDEX 


253 


Patriarchal  stories  of  Genesis, 
108,  126,  Ap.  VII 
Penalties,  177,  183-192 
Persia,  influence  of,  223 
Philistines,  3,  4,  21,  50,  59,  62,  63, 
154,  Ap.  Ill 

Phoenicians,  Hebrew  relations 
with,  72,  113,  115,  168 
Plagues,  198,  199 
Poetry,  Hebrew,  159, 161,  229 
Polygamy,  38,  83,  124,  128-131 
Polytheism,  primitive,  93,  94 
Poor,  38,  150,  151,  188,  197 
Prayer,  215,  216  (See  “  Sacred 
Lot.”) 

Precedents,  military,  158,  159 ;  le¬ 
gal,  177,  181 

Priestley  school  (P),  9,  10,  40,  42, 
104,  107 

Priests,  heads  of  families,  36,  43, 
76;  Levites,  87,  43,  75-80,  89; 
kings,  180 

Princes,  dress,  148;  employments, 
146,  147 ;  education,  167,  168 ; 
death,  143 
Prisons,  53,  194, 195 
Profanity,  184,  185 
Property,  disposition  of,  133 ;  not 
held  by  wife,  132 

Prophetic  guild,  60,  61,  65,  97,  223 
Prophets,  origin  of,  223  ;  literary, 
109, 110,  217-223 ;  interpreters  of 
Yahweh,  216;  influence,  222,  223 
Prostitution,  91,  131,  175,  200 
Proverbs,  military,  158 
Psalms,  109 
Pyre,  funeral,  206 

Rebekah,  courtship  of,  85,  128- 
130 

Rehoboam,  102,  113 
Religion,  in  time  of  the  Judges, 
87-94  ;  in  time  of  the  monarchy, 
207-224 


Reuben,  20,  27,  55,  125,  126 
Rich,  150,  222 
Rizpah,  193 

Sabbath,  190 

Sacrifices,  early,  39,  40  ;  threshold, 
40  ;  blood,  40  ;  burnt,  42  ;  do¬ 
mestic,  90  ;  communal,  43 ;  social 
significance,  39-46;  in  Genesis, 
41-42  ;  kinds  of,  191 
Sacrifices,  human,  57,  58,  63,  90, 
91,  212,  213 

Samaria,  134,  141,  142,  220 
Samson,  story  of,  11,  12,  33, 84, 
49-54 ;  marriage,  25,  26,  51 ;  un¬ 
der  demonic  power,  51 ,  52,  53  ; 
his  labours,  51-54,  66 ;  use  of 
foxes,  52 ;  at  Gaza,  53,  54 ; 
thirst  quenched,  53  ;  with  Deli-=- 
lah,  53  ;  death,  53,  54  ;  influence, 
54 

Samuel,  Books  of,  12,  44,  45,  66, 
67,  104-107,  111,  117,  164,  217, 
218 

Samuel,  story  of,  12,  59  ;  time,  47 ; 
a  seer,  60 ;  at  a  feast,  44,  45 ;  re¬ 
lations  to  Saul,  60,  65  ;  keeper  of 
Shiloh  sanctuary,  65,  89 
Sanctuaries,  keepers  of,  181,  182  ; 

as  asylums,  194 
Satan,  conception  of,  223,  224 
Saul,  story  of,  12,  58-64  ;  at  a  sac¬ 
rificial  feast,  45  ;  as  a  vindicator, 
4,  47,  58,  59 ;  sphere  of  in¬ 
fluence,  59 ;  under  demonic 
power,  61 ;  at  Jabesh-Gilead,  61 ; 
supported  by  Benjamin,  4,  61, 

62,  80,  122 ;  jealousy  of  David, 

63,  64 ;  afflicted  with  melan¬ 
cholia,  63,  64  ;  relations  to  Sam¬ 
uel,  65,  117  ;  close  of  his  career, 
64 ;  dirge  over,  168,  205,  229 ; 
crown  and  anklets,  155, 156 

Schools,  literary,  166,  167 


254 


INDEX 


Schools,  want  of,  167 
Septuagint,  103,  199,  204  n.,  214 
Settlement  of  Canaan,  5,  15-21, 
Ap.  I 

Sewage  disposal,  143,  144,  151 
Sheba,  rebellion  of,  156-158,  173 
Shechem,  sanctuary  of,  18 ;  viola¬ 
tion,  28-31 ;  Baal  of,  90 ;  Patri¬ 
archal  stories,  104 
Sheep-sheering,  feasts  of,  37,  82 
Sheiks  (free  citizens),  68,  119,  120, 
124,  177,  178,  181,  184,  192-194 
Sheol,  205 
Shephelah,  139 
Shepherds,  Hebrews  as,  145 
Shiloh,  65,  89  ;  rape  of  maidens  of, 
34,  80,  81 

Shimei,  121,  122,  185 
Shrines,  85,  89-91,  147,  203,  212 
Sickness,  202-204 
Siesta,  134 

Simeon,  settlement  of,  17 ;  shat¬ 
tering  of,  28-31 

Sisera,  campaign  of,  87 ;  campaign 
against,  11,  27 ;  death  of,  55 
Slavery,  130,  131,  150,  158,  186, 
188-190,  219 

Social  life,  sources  for,  9-12,  89, 
103-110;  transition  in  days  of 
Saul,  59 

Solomon,  want  of  unity  under,  101, 
102,  122, 181 ;  wish  to  exalt  him, 
105 ;  Deuteronomist’s  concep¬ 
tion  of,  105 ;  relations  to  Hiram, 
113;  wives,  113;  as  polygamist, 
129,  130 ;  relations  to  sheiks, 
120 ;  throne  held  with  difficulty, 
122,  181 ;  character  of  reign,  123 
Song,  9,  48 

Song  of  Deborah,  11,  21,  27,  32,  33, 
55,  92,  96,  229 
Sorcery,  185,  186,  220,  222 
Southern  Kingdom,  101,  102,  152 
(See  “Judah.”) 


Spirits,  good  and  evil,  223 
Stoning,  192,  193 
Strangers,  treatment  of,  171 
Strong  men,  54,  202 
Suicide,  172 
Syrians,  114,  154 

Taboo,  62,  63,  178, 179 
Tent  of  tryst,  89 
Teraphim,  93,  94 
Theft,  186 
Threshing-floor,  140 
Threshing-sledge,  145,  212 
Tombs,  206 
Totemism,  94 
Trade,  71-74,  113,  114 
Traditions,  10,  172,  173 
Transportation,  141 
Travel,  68,  71,  79,  151,  152 
Trespass,  187 
Tribute,  64, 1 12 

Unity,  civil,  want  of,  3,  4,  27,  28, 
95,  96;  slow  growth,  95-98,  111, 
112 

Unity,  religious,  92 
Uriah,  113,  174 
Utilities,  146 

Veracity,  laws  of,  188 
Villages,  agricultural,  139,  140; 
apprehensive  nature  of,  137 ; 
life  in,  136-140 ;  relation  to 
cities,  138 

Vintage,  feast  of,  34,  37 
Virgins,  protected,  35, 187 

Wagons,  68,  146,  152 
Walls,  city,  136,  137,  142,  149,  150, 
156,  157 

Warfare,  153-160  ;  equipment,  154, 
155  ;  battle  array,  156  ;  siege  of 
cities,  156-158 ;  woman’s  part, 
33  ;  sights  of,  150  ;  brutalising 
effects,  159,  160 


INDEX 


255 


Washing,  149 
Wine,  145 

Wine-press,  140,  145 
Wives,  freedom  of,  132 ;  at  feasts, 
134,  174  ;  their  tents,  188  ;  their 
perquisites,  36;  remedies  of, 
202 ;  of  slaves,  189 ;  among  Baby¬ 
lonians,  132 
Woman,  a  wise,  173 
Woman,  position  of,  32-36,  84-86 ; 
unchivalrous  treatment  of,  35, 
36 ;  in  warfare,  33 ;  influence,  58 
Women,  “  devoted,”  91,  131,  175, 
200 

Writing,  origin  of,  161-165;  em¬ 
ployment,  167 

Yahweh,  as  God  of  Midian  (Ken- 
ites),  8 ;  as  God  of  Hebrews,  7, 
8,  228 ;  war-god,  89,  155,  208 ; 


covenant-god,  90,  193,  209;  as  a 
unifier,  95-97  ;  rival  of  Baal,  111 ; 
abode,  111,  112,  226 ;  shrines,  194 
(See  “  Ark  ”)  ;  images,  76-78, 
92 ;  consulted  by  lot,  76,  89,  214, 
216 ;  character  of  his  worship, 
45,  91,  92,  191,  209-213;  swear¬ 
ing  by,  184 ;  offences  against, 
176,  179,  184,  209 ;  afflictions  of, 
200 ;  anthropomorphic  concep¬ 
tions  of,  211  ;  priest’s  desire  to 
exalt,  107 ;  prophetic  thoughts 
of,  218-222 

Yahweh,  men  of,  89,  90,  182 

Yahweh,  messenger  of,  11,  33,  50, 
56,  89 

Yahwism,  growth  of,  8,  207-224 

Zeba,  121 

Zebulun,  settlement  of,  19 


